Today's Washington Post reports on some of the religious concerns raised in Albrecht v. Treon, a case argued earlier this month before the Ohio Supreme Court. (Video of Jan. 23 argument.) A Jan. 20 Toledo Blade article has additional details on the case. Mark and Diane Albrecht discovered after their son's body had been buried that his brain which had been removed for examination in an autopsy had not been returned. This led to a federal class action against against the coroners and commissioners in 87 of Ohio's 88 counties. At issue is whether the Albrechts "were denied due process of law when the county 'took' parts of their son's body."
The federal trial court certified to the Ohio Supreme Court the question of whether Ohio law grants a right to next-of-kin to a decedent's body parts that have been removed in an autopsy. It noted that a subsequently enacted Ohio law guarantees return of body parts, but only when the autopsy is contrary to the deceased person's religious beliefs. Albrecht v. Treon, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18613 (SD OH, March 17, 2007). The Washington Post calls attention to one controversial line in the brief of the medical examiners filed with the Ohio Supreme Court: "The real family interest is in the 'soul' of the deceased, if it continues in an afterlife, or in the memory of the 'soul', rather than to the dead carcass."
