By SHANNON O. WELLS
During its first meeting of the 2025-26 academic year, Faculty Assembly discussed and ultimately approved the Human Cadavers and Recognizable Human Body Parts draft policy.
Pitt has sought to enhance the existing policy by requiring authorization for all uses of human cadavers and “recognizable body parts,” including if the scope of a cadaver-related project changes.
Brittany Conner, policy specialist in the Office of Policy Development and Management, provided an overview of the draft updated policy to Faculty Assembly as she did for the Senate Research Committee at its May 16 meeting.
She explained that while the Committee for Oversight of Research and Clinical Training Involving Decedents (CORID) and Office for Oversight of Anatomic Specimens (OOAS) are already responsible for providing an “ethical view of projects using human cadavers and recognizable human body parts,” the office also is responsible for ensuring compliance with federal and state law and ensuring logistics are feasible at the institution.
“These provisions in this policy, when it comes down to the operational pieces, are not new,” Conner explained in May. “It’s really just documenting what we’re already doing.”
The policy was first formulated in 2023 following an abuse-of-corpse case against two former Pitt students who were charged in late 2022 based on an incident in the Victoria Hall anatomy lab.
In addition to the Research committee, the policy also has been reviewed and approved by the Pitt Operations Council.
The policy is available for public comment through Oct. 3.
“This policy review formalizes the roles, goals and responsibilities related to the use, management and disposition of human cadavers and recognizable body parts,” Conner explained to Faculty Assembly, noting that the rules previously had only applied to the medical school and Oakland campus. “As we went through this process, we recognize that there are cadaver materials at the regional campuses and in other Health Sciences schools. Therefore, it needs to be a University-wide policy.”
If the policy is approved by Senate Council and signed by Chancellor Joan Gabel, it will replace interim policy RI 12, which is available on the Office of Policy Development and Management website.
“Generally, this policy formalizes many processes that are already in place …” Conner said, with new elements including training requirements, documentation and acknowledgement related to the treatment of cadavers and recognized body parts and legacy collections with the court and the OOAS.
A vast audit of “legacy collections” of human cadavers and body parts has been conducted of all human remains stored on campus.
A discussion with the Department of Anthropology led the policy committee to change the term “specimens” to “recognizable human body parts.” Jennifer Mueller, director of undergraduate studies in the department, engaged in earlier research at Howard University where the terminology was changed.
“She suggested that we change our name,” Conner told the Research committee in May. “The term ‘specimen’ has been conflated with derogatory uses in the past, and it does have a well-defined and proper medical use.
With the policy a “public-facing document, we wanted to emphasize that the University views these human remains as human and dignified and not just as a tool for research.”
Conner told Faculty Assembly that she thinks Pitt has “very unique structures and processes in place to recognize the tremendous contributions of decedents and their families to research and education.
“I think we were the first, and perhaps still the only institution in this country to have a structure, which is a companion for an Institutional Research Board (IRB) that covers living subjects or decedents,” she said, noting the importance of “very, very intense structures to be sure that we’re respecting the wishes of families and those who are kind enough to give us these tremendous resources for research and education.”
Along with grammar suggestions to a particular subsection of the policy, John Stoner, teaching professor and undergraduate advisor in the Department of History, asked if the Department of Anthropology’s use of recognizable human body parts falls under the category of “legacy collections.”
“Maybe (it’s) just a footnote, just to be clear again, since ‘legacy’ has big ethical and moral considerations in contemporary culture to just (say) the policy’s exclusion of the anthropology department is also intended to be either enforced here or not enforced here,” he said. “Just a suggestion.”
Responding to committee members’ questions about entities being excluded from the policy and the possibility of providing a timeline for the Department of Anthropology or others to meet requirements, Conner said the chosen approach made the most sense from a procedural standpoint.
“We spent a considerable amount of time on this issue, and it was actually very educational for me to understand a lot of the specific issues in anthropology, but it just seemed that … you might make a policy confusing,” she explained.
Carey Balaban, professor in the School of Medicine’s Departments of Otolaryngology, suggested clarifying the definition of “recognizable body parts,” because otherwise, “you’re going to end up finding all sorts of stuff around, and you’re going to have to keep track of it in some kind of a registry that is not being used for what you have,” he said. “There’s virtually no risk associated with it being where it is now. I’m just trying to save you a little trouble and unnecessary work in the long run, keeping track of it.”
Conner said the policy was created using benchmarks from other institutions related to their policy. “We use their definition of ‘recognizable body part.’ … Five universities have this as their definition, so we kind of took that …”
Some of the questions raised regarding term definitions and policy applications will be included in a memo to Chancellor Gabel once it is approved by Senate Council.
Following a motion to approve the draft policy including the “understood friendly amendments” suggested, Faculty Assembly approved the draft policy update on human cadavers with 33 voting in favor, two opposed and five abstentions.
The draft policy will be discussed and likely voted on at the October Senate Council meeting.
Shannon O. Wells is a writer for the University Times. Reach him at shannonw@pitt.edu.
Have a story idea or news to share? Share it with the University Times.