A qualitative study of how students learn from human cadavers

Anatomy is a key area of knowledge relevant to many disciplines and cadaveric dissection is a popular and effective option for anatomy teaching for many disciplines. Much of the previous re-search into how students learn from cadaveric dissection involves students of medicine. This paper revisits key findings reporting research involving medical students outlining the complexity of the issues raised in learning anatomy through cadaveric dissection. We also present the findings from a small-scale qualitative study, which aimed to explore students from a range of disciplines about their experiences of learning anatomy from human cadavers, conducted over a 12 month period at the University of Sheffield, UK. This included eight first-year medical students, one first-year dentistry student, two students from a post graduate course in the Department of Archaeology, and two second-year biomedical science (BMS) students. The study provides important information about students, including those outside medicine, and their experiences of learning anatomy from cadaveric dissection. Students could observe anatomical variation and learn though the multisensory experience of dissection. Overall, cadaveric dissection was viewed positively although there was one exception. The most important findings are that there was no suggestion that students objectified the body, and this is in contrast to previous work in the area. In fact, students disliked the aspect of pro-sections that meant that they were disconnected from their human bodies. The second important finding is the similarities of perceptions across disciplines, and this is a departure from previous re-search, which focuses on medical students. We make some tentative suggestions for the preparation and support for students learning anatomy from cadaveric dissection

No disponible

Anonymous or known donors? A brief discussion of the psychosocial issues raised by removing anonymity from sperm donors.

In spite of a trend towards open identity, the ethical issues raised by the removal of anonymity from sperm donors are still contentious and raise controversy about the significance of genetic inheritance and what are often seen as competing rights claims for the children born, for donors and for the parents of donor insemination (DI) offspring. This review provides a short discussion of the arguments for and against the disclosure of donor insemination status to offspring, which are at the heart of the controversy over anonymity as they relate to the stakeholders in the process.

To name or not to name? An overview of the social and ethical issues raised by removing anonymity from sperm donors.

The aim of this paper is to focus on the ethical issues raised by the removal of anonymity from sperm donors. The increasing currency of a 'right to genetic truth' is clearly visible in the drive to revise the legislation on donor anonymity in Western and European countries. The ethical debate is polarized between the 'right to privacy' of the donor or parent and the 'right to know' of the prospective child. However, it is evident that religious, social and cultural attitudes have an overarching impact on attitudes towards sperm donation generally and anonymity specifically. In Asian countries, the social and cultural heritage is hugely diverse and different from those of the West. This review considers the research exploring the complexity of ethical issues informing this debate, and argues that parent's decisions to reveal donor insemination origins to their children are highly complex and relate to a range of social and cultural attitudes that have not been addressed within the policy to remove anonymity from sperm donors.