Who’s holding the stakes ?

Who’s holding the stakes ?

Contextualisation of the stakeholder-theory in ethical dilemmas concerning historical human remains

Part 1

Contextualisation of the stakeholder-theory in ethical dilemmas concerning historical human remains

Part 1

Applied Anatomy, Retreat Day, September 2010

The initial problem

✦ Invasive research methods outside of accessible ethical discourse (vs. clinical research that is always linked to an ethical board and an extensive discussion among peers)

✦ leads to a destruction of the standard of bodily integrity (cf. ‘do no harm’)

✦ Absence of consent

✦ creates a void of intentions, wishes, interests and refusals

✦ concerning bodily integrity

✦ concerning personal privacy

✦ concerning the ‘after-life’ of their bodily remains

✦ undisturbed peace

absence of consent

ethical standards contemporary to the

remainsresearcher’s ethical standards

Dangers:

Advantages:

Disadvantages:

✤ cultural dispersion✤ lack of precise knowledge of a culture✤ assimilation of an individual into the strongest group of a culture

✤ false reconstruction of values✤ cultural falsification

✤ reconstruction by hist. analysis ✤ wish to ‘change history’ when a ruling culture takes over, i.e. jewish historical chronicles ‘deleting’ the Samaritain line of priests of the ‘Temple’)

✤ based on a consideration of a the culture of the individual during life: ‘remains’ become an individual again

✤ based on interdisciplinary exchange between domains (humanities & sciences etc.)

✤ our research today is unprecedented and would probably always be denied by a former state of culture

✤ former cultures believed much more in a bodily integrity as part of their ‘after-life’ as a need (moral implications)

✤ only ‘bad’ people lost their bodily integrity to ensure their ‘death’/torture etc. in the after-life (cf. traitor punishment in MA England)

✤ modern needs are taken into account✤ clinical implications✤ historical value✤ altruistic impetus, moral motivations

✤ no unity of ethical standards today✤ personal moral values vs. standardised theory of action

✤ valorisation of the saving of ‘modern’ lives will always dominate the need and wish to respect ‘old’ human remains

✤ no taking into account of any cultural standards of the time of the remains

✤ disrespect of the individual’s wishes

absence of consent

ethical standards contemporary to the

remainsresearcher’s ethical standards

decisional result for research:

ethically unacceptable ethically acceptable

the stakeholder theory

The Stakeholder Theory✦ theory of organisational management✦ originally an extension of the shareholder theory

✦ takes into accounts every member of an enterprise regardless of their shares

✦ defines not only new groups of actors, but also the situations under which they should be considered

✦ vs. an absolute fixed model of organisation✦ normative theory✦ typology for finding the stakeholders

✦ power influence✦ legitimacy✦ urgency

✦ applications of the stakeholder theory: ✦ law✦ enterprises

Donaldson, T.; Preston, L. E. (1995): “The Stakeholder Theory of the Corporation: Concepts, Evidence and Implications”, Academy of Management Review (Academy of Management) 20, (1): 71.

Mitchell, R.K.; Agle, B.R. Wood, D. J. (1997): “Toward a Theory of Stakeholder Identification and Salience: Defining the Principle of Who and What Really Counts”. Academy of Management Review (Academy of Management) 22 (4), 853-886.

✦ not a general theory of social (inter)action✦ it has no underlying theory of moral validation

✦ clashes with the cultural differences in the world today

✦ vs. our standard of cultural relativism

✦ its origins presuppose an interest

Outlook✦ Advantages:

✦ varied groups of potential stakeholders can be found

✦ possible adaptation for various situations concerned with Mummy research

✦ Dangers:

✦ knowing about the problem implies solving the moral problem

✦ stakeholder theory presupposes a good interest for the mummy by the potential stakeholder

✦ cannot account for abusive, exploitative interests

✦ the problem of posthumous harm is transferred, but not solved

✦ as long as someone else, a stakeholder, sanctions a procedure, we’re clear

✦ assumes the advancement of science as an absolute value that would be shared by anybody would they know about it (continuous positivism)