HC2121: Ethical Analysis of Corpse Exhibition in Australia - Essay

This essay delves into the controversial topic of corpse donation for public exhibition in Australia, sparked by a news article about Australians consenting to donate their bodies for display. It explores the arguments for and against the practice, considering cultural sensitivities, corporate social responsibility, and ethical decision-making processes. The essay analyzes whether the most appropriate ethical decisions have been made by the exhibition company, examining the perspectives of social activists, legal bodies, and the company itself. It further applies ethical philosophies such as ethical relativism and social contract theory to evaluate the situation, and concludes by emphasizing the need for companies to align their activities with societal norms and consider the sentiments of the families involved. The essay also touches upon the potential for legal implications and the importance of transparency in the company's operations.

Running Head: BUSINESS ETHICS
Name of Student
Name of University
Author note

1
BUSINESS ETHICS
Introduction
The article elaborates on the controversial issue of corpse donation for exhibition display.
A total of 14 Australians have willingly consented to donating their corpses to be displayed
publicly at a worldwide exhibition. While Melbourne’s taxidermist view the decision as a poetic
stance, several social activists have expressed concern and even aversion towards the process
involving the action. The company managers have repeatedly corroborated their sense of ethics
and value while engaging in the process of preserving and plastinating the body, before it is
finally put up for display. 1Considering it is a worldwide travelling exhibition, the idea of
original corpses being displayed at public places is quite offensive in some cultures and hence
has raised a lot of controversies in many countries, Australia included. However, the protests
were considerably mitigated with Tom Zaller’s (the president of the company) assertion that it is
just like the mummies preserved by Egyptians and holds cultural and historical significance.
Considering the fact that these corpses belonged to people who had consented to their bodies
being used for a purpose after their death, makes it an appropriate and ethical decision on part of
the owners of the exhibition company.
Discussion
The poetic justification of a decision like this cannot be neglected altogether, and the
taxidermist has good reasons for supporting Julia Delville’s decision, one of the many Austrians
who have consented to this rather unusual activity. According to the arguments made in the
article, this is not a violation against human rights since people are neither forced nor
manipulated into donating their bodies for an “aesthetic” and educative purpose; they do so
willingly as a way of being useful to greater community after their death. The body of the donors
1Prasad, G., Karkera, B., Pandit, S., Desai, D. and Tonse, R.G., 2015. Preservation of tissue by plastination: A
Review. Int. J. Adv. Health Sci, 1(11), pp.27-31.

2
BUSINESS ETHICS
can be interpreted as an anatomical work of art and can be highly insightful for visitors aiming to
purse anatomy and aesthetics. The questionnaires prepared for interrogating the donators center
on their preferences of depiction, and that is evidence enough to the committee’s regard for the
emotional prerequisites of the donators. The aim is to give the donators full artistic control while
meeting the business needs. The process of plastination dates back to 1977 by Dr. Gunther Von
Hagens, who used chemicals and preservatives to make corpses disposable for indeterminate
time. The institute founded by Whalley provided specimen only to those that confirmed using
them solely for medical and research purposes. The possibility of a future legal sanction could
arise from then fact that the exhibition could be doing this mostly as a cheap publicity stunt for
drawing in more curious audience2. The display might serve nothing more than a source of
entertainment for a reckless and fun-loving crowd; which disgraces the noble purpose of the
donator. Social activism groups and legal bodies in that case have every reason to sue the
company for toying with the emotions of the families of the deceased, and making profit at the
cost of their sacrifice. 3The company has encountered severe criticisms and oppositions that
questions the ethical aspect of an activity like this. The president of the company, Tom Zaller
combated those resistances by arguing that the practice is not new but had been in popular
culture ever since the ancient times in Egypt were civilizations used to mummify dead bodies
without the intention of public display in the future. The donators are given full information of
the scenario that is to occur following their death. Nothing is held back from them as an attempt
to manipulate the donators to meet the business requirements of the company. The organization
has been charged for alleged use of Chinese prisoners that had been executed; a charge that was
later admitted by the managers. However, the organizers of the exhibition denies having used
2 Champney, T.H., 2016. The business of bodies: Ethical perspectives on for‐profit body donation
companies. Clinical Anatomy, 29(1), pp.25-29.
3 Jones, D.G., 2014. Using and respecting the dead human body: An anatomist's perspective. Clinical
Anatomy, 27(6), pp.839-843.

3
BUSINESS ETHICS
bodies of deceased people without their consent while alive, in the current collection of displays.
The allegations were later investigated by the high courts in Australia and proven unfounded.
The company maintains that they have always followed the consent policy of the living for
engaging in the activity.
The Australian Ethics Centre executive director Simon Longstaff is of the opinion that
ethical aspect of an individual’s cadaver cannot and should not be determined by the belief
system, religious values and perceptions (concerning afterlife and reverence to the dead) of the
living people. Some people have expressed discernment towards the action by stating that using
the corpse of a person without their prior permission is equivalent to disrespecting their integral
dignity while they were alive. While there is no denying that the dead people are not waiting in
their afterlife to be offended by the ill-treatments meted out to them, the ethical obligations of the
fact that they were once living people with an opinion and societal existence must be addressed.
This raises questions of the company’s corporate citizenship and corporate social responsibility.
The activity is highly culture-sensitive, dealing with the emotions and beliefs of people4. Since
they are dealing with an issue as sensitive as death, it becomes their responsibility to consider the
personal views of at least the families of the donators and align their activities in a way that it
doesn’t hurt their sentiments. Moreover, the article does not state anything about giving any
commission to the family members of the donators out of the profit they have made from
displaying their corpses. People of Australia and of other countries initially considered this a
grisly horror which is meant more for entertaining than for educating. Additionally, it is
extremely taboo in most cultures to display a corpse in public places. The organization is a
worldwide travelling company and might be faced with severe oppositions in many countries on
4 Jones, D.G., 2016. The artificial world of plastination: A challenge to religious perspectives on the dead human
body. The New Bioethics, 22(3), pp.237-252.

4
BUSINESS ETHICS
account of the candidness and the graphic nature of the displays. The controversy of the
company using prisoners and corpses of people without then life consent triggers further ethical
concerns among people. Some of the displays even had bullet marks in their skulls suggesting
that they were assassinated and that they had no say in the decision of their corpses being used
for business purposes in the future.
The ambiguous nature of the article makes it difficult to decide whether the company has
made the most ethical decision. From what is provided in the discussion, it is fair to state that the
organizers have attempted to meet the ethical standards of business as far as possible, although
the minor glitches in some aspects are hard not to notice. As mentioned earlier, there is no clear
evidence as to whether the family members of these deceased donators are entitled to a
commission. There is no doubt that the organization makes a lump sum profit from displaying
these corpses, although they claim to have life consent from these people, there is no evidence to
prove whether these people given a payment for agreeing to contribute to the progress of their
business and to greater community.5 In severe cases, the law might be compelled to interfere in
the business operations considering the overall social sensitivity to the issue. It is also not clear if
the company pays tax to the government of the different countries they put up their shows in
while travelling. They make huge profits off the curious locals who are willing to pay greater
amounts than they usually should for visiting exhibitions, just to witness something to unusual
and larger than life. In other words, the company feeds off the curiosity of the naïve visitors
without necessarily feeling entitled to pay a fair share to the government; and that is enough
reasons for a legal interference. However, if the matter is looked at holistically, there is little or
rather no reasons for claiming that the organization has no ethical concerns in operating the
5 Crane, A., Matten, D. and Spence, L., 2013. Corporate social responsibility in a global context.
Khan, A., Muttakin, M.B. and Siddiqui, J., 2013. Corporate governance and corporate social responsibility
disclosures: Evidence from an emerging economy. Journal of business ethics, 114(2), pp.207-223.

5
BUSINESS ETHICS
business. Most of the current displays in the collection are people who had willingly consented to
their dead body being used for this purpose. In most cases, the exhibition has proved beneficial
for art and aesthetics enthusiasts and educative for students of anatomy who have reported that
only few other research centers have been successful in providing an accurate and excellently
preserved specimen of the human body. Considered this way, the benefits of the exhibition
overshadow the minor lacks in ethical concerns. The ethical issues can be met by aligning with
the moral philosophies formulated by scholars meant for helping organizations take better ethical
decisions in relation to their business operations.
For deciding what is right and wrong, business organizations often make use of
traditional philosophical approaches to ethics. Evaluating the case from a sensible and broad-
minded perspective, the most appropriate philosophy applicable to the situation is the ethical
relativism approach. The philosophy of ethical relativism is focused on doing that which serves
the society as a whole, decentering from individual demands. According to this school of
thought, ethics deals with attitudes and feelings based on social conventions and encourage
behavior that is sanctioned by contemporary societal norms. 6 If the concept is applied to the
6 Blackburn, S., 2013. Relativism. The Blackwell Guide to Ethical Theory, pp.43-58.

6
BUSINESS ETHICS
particular issue that is being talked about in the article, the organization will be aided well to
combat the criticism and engage in corporate social responsibility. The exhibition may not be
suitable for all ages and cultures, the display must be censored in some culture-sensitive
countries. A clear declaration of the ethical stances taken by the company for the execution of
the plan must be issued publicly and stuck to the entrance of the exhibition halls. In other words,
each show in different countries and culture must be dealt with differently. Another ethical
philosophy that can be applied in this context is social contract theory. The principle concept of
the theory maintains that people living in a society must form an agreement establishing the
political and moral rules of conduct. Each individual can live morally by his/her own choice
without feeling obligated to serve any higher divine purpose. These social contrasts are free to be
explicit like the case in point and no one is entitled to a justification unless anyone is harmed in
the process. 7
Conclusion
The essay sheds light on the issue of corpse exhibition and displays. Within this, mention
can be made of the views of Mexican critics towards taxidermy. On the other, social activists
have undertaken a poetic stance towards the display of corpse. The managers of the company
have adopted systematic processing of the corpses before displaying it to the public. Most of the
critics consider the practice to be unethical and offensive, leading to controversies in the religion.
As a result of this, protests were held in the form of preservation of the mummies. This approach
enhanced the cultural values and aspects. Consent towards donating the corpses preserved the
individual sentiments of the people.
7 Muldoon, R., 2016. Social contract theory for a diverse world: Beyond tolerance. Routledge.

7
BUSINESS ETHICS
References:
ABC News. (2019). Julia DeVille's 'poetic' decision to put her dead body on display naked.
[online] Available at: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-01-18/body-wrolds-donating-your-
body-to-be-displayed-naked/10722530 [Accessed 28 Jan. 2019].
Blackburn, S., 2013. Relativism. The Blackwell Guide to Ethical Theory, pp.43-58.
Champney, T.H., 2016. The business of bodies: Ethical perspectives on for‐profit body donation
companies. Clinical Anatomy, 29(1), pp.25-29.
Crane, A., Matten, D. and Spence, L., 2013. Corporate social responsibility in a global context.
Jones, D.G., 2014. Using and respecting the dead human body: An anatomist's
perspective. Clinical Anatomy, 27(6), pp.839-843
Jones, D.G., 2016. The artificial world of plastination: A challenge to religious perspectives on
the dead human body. The New Bioethics, 22(3), pp.237-252
Khan, A., Muttakin, M.B. and Siddiqui, J., 2013. Corporate governance and corporate social
responsibility disclosures: Evidence from an emerging economy. Journal of business
ethics, 114(2), pp.207-223.
Muldoon, R., 2016. Social contract theory for a diverse world: Beyond tolerance. Routledge.
Prasad, G., Karkera, B., Pandit, S., Desai, D. and Tonse, R.G., 2015. Preservation of tissue by
plastination: A Review. Int. J. Adv. Health Sci, 1(11), pp.27-31.