debate report

oh dear it's been so long since I've blogged I realise none of you actually KNOW about the debate! This very evening I spoke at a BMA Students debate, Manchester vs. Liverpool on the subject of 'Televised Anatomical Dissection : Education or Obscenity?'. I had to introduce in a team of four, and for those who are interested, my speech is reproduced below:


Ladies and gentleman, Chair,

We are here tonight to talk about an issue which cuts to the very core of our society’s values – freedom of choice, free access of information for all, and the boundaries we set on learning. Education or obscenity? Respect or indignity? Art or atrocity?

When we speak of televised anatomy dissection, it is important to define what we mean exactly. Televised anatomy dissection is the dissection of the human body presented factually, to inform and educate, showing respect for all those involved, dead or alive. Anatomy for Beginners, which was screened on Channel 4 could be considered to be an example of the genre. Human bodies were dissected in front of a live audience, based on four themes related to different body systems. What is important to note about the series is that all those whose bodies were used had given their full consent before death, and those in the audience were medical students and people who had themselves agreed to donate their bodies to science after death. All participants were therefore fully aware of what was involved in the programme. Anatomy for Beginners was screened after the watershed, thus preventing inappropriate exposure of young children to the subject matter. In this way, freedom from watching the programme was ensured. Which left those that wanted the freedom to be able to watch to learn from it.

We are not condoning Plastic Surgery Live, cannibalism or programmes on similar subjects masquerading as educational resources. We are simply demonstrating that dissection has a valuable role in teaching the average person, who may not know their pelvis from their patella. How many times have you, as a medical student, had people ask you which side is my heart on? Or where exactly are the kidneys anyway? There is widespread ignorance about the human body and its time something was done to redress the imbalance. Television is an ideal medium of education which reaches all sections of our society.

We believe strongly that all people deserve respect in life and in death. Death is one of the few remaining taboos in our society, not easily faced by any of us. Yet it is the perverse reality that simulated scenes of death and violence are perfectly acceptable to almost all of us. How many here have seen Silence of the Lambs? Then again, sad and distressing as it may be, our television screens often come alive with images of torture, murder, massacre rape. On every news broadcast. At any time. Without warning. Death has many faces on our screens, and while for many of us it is uncomfortable to watch, there is no logic in banning one and allowing all others without question.

Morality is relative – if we chose two people in this room at random, is it really likely that they would agree with each other’s views on moral issues? Abortion, the legalisation of cannabis, euthanasia, even whether to take a twenty pound note you find on the street or hand it in – we each have our own ideas on all these issues and more. If producers avoided clashing with the morality of every single person in Britain, it would result in bland, mindless television. At the same time, controversial issues need to be dealt with sensitively showing respect for those who don’t want to watch things they find offensive.

Televised dissection brings an ancient practice to the modern age. Dissecting the human body is not a new concept, and has played an important part in the education of doctors for centuries. Why then, can this same method of education not be used to educate the lay person about his or her body? If it is acceptable for medical students, why does it stop being acceptable for the public? Professor von Hagens, of Anatomy for Beginners fame, commented that he ‘re-democratises anatomy’. An understanding of the human body is not the exclusive right of the medical profession alone.

Many of those who volunteer to offer their bodies to science do so with high ideals: to continue to benefit society after death. Don’t they benefit society by helping to instruct an entire nation in the mysteries of the human body?


Wonder if anyone read that? Anyway it was good, and got to interrupt and fluster the opposition several times. The esteemed judges decided to say it was a joint win (as though we were kids "Never mind, you BOTH won!"), althought it was CLEAR we had the better argument. I got a box of Quality Street (dammit tune's in my head now) and, having decided to forego the cheese and wine, skipped off back to Stockport.