The basic human rights awarded to all human individuals in this world include, first and foremost, the right to equality and the right to life. Yet, these rights have been violated for centuries, escalating in the twentieth century “an era characterized by a phenomenal increase in the frequency and intensity of human rights violations…” (Ferllini 2008, 7). This period essentially caused the establishment of legal parameters, through the intervention of international law, in order to prosecute those who committed such crimes. Anthropologists and archaeologists joined the fold in the 1980s when investigations of abuses were conducted in Latin America, a place where violations occur almost continuously (Ferllini 2008, 7). Organizations across
…show more content…
Among them Roxana Ferllini, a forensic anthropologist, and D.W. Steadman and William Haglund, the former an anthropologist and the latter a physician for human rights, argue that a multidisciplinary approach is not just the most effective but is required “in order to complete the tasks at hand to the satisfaction of all parties” (Ferllini 2008, 7). Steadman and Haglund write that the productivity of anthropologists increases when in a multidisciplinary context. They claim that human rights investigations are the perfect opportunity for anthropologists, geologists, archaeologists, pathologists, et cetera to apply their skills and knowledge to the same event (Steadman and Haglund 2005, 2). Together a forensic anthropologist and pathologist are able to provide biological determinants for victim identification. In exhumations, archaeologists play just as important a role as the forensic anthropologists in documenting and cataloguing remains and material culture or personal artifacts. In the case the trial of Rios Montt in Guatemala, the multidisciplinary approach proved pivotal in the conviction of Montt. Together Beatriz Manz, a social anthropologist and international eyewitness, Elizabeth Oglesby, a geographer, Clyde Collins Snow, an anthropology and archaeology consultant, and several others of different disciplines were able to bring the first …show more content…
The standards which most anthropologists use are based off of European and American measurements. Kimmerle states that when applying one standard to a specific population results vary for three reasons: “different populations grow, develop, or age differently from one another due to environmental and genetic factors… may result as statistical artifacts depending on the reference population and particular statistical methodology that is used… [and] inter-observer variation” (Kimmerle 2004). In the case of human rights violations during and after the Spanish Civil War, Ferllini notes that research has begun to using different diagnostic criteria, aiming to find specific population biological parameters for identification (Ferllini 2014, 69). However, she also points out that many of these human rights investigations rely on volunteers, due to lack of funding, who have no guidelines as to which standards are applied, which can lead to discrepancies in court cases (2014,
Among them Roxana Ferllini, a forensic anthropologist, and D.W. Steadman and William Haglund, the former an anthropologist and the latter a physician for human rights, argue that a multidisciplinary approach is not just the most effective but is required “in order to complete the tasks at hand to the satisfaction of all parties” (Ferllini 2008, 7). Steadman and Haglund write that the productivity of anthropologists increases when in a multidisciplinary context. They claim that human rights investigations are the perfect opportunity for anthropologists, geologists, archaeologists, pathologists, et cetera to apply their skills and knowledge to the same event (Steadman and Haglund 2005, 2). Together a forensic anthropologist and pathologist are able to provide biological determinants for victim identification. In exhumations, archaeologists play just as important a role as the forensic anthropologists in documenting and cataloguing remains and material culture or personal artifacts. In the case the trial of Rios Montt in Guatemala, the multidisciplinary approach proved pivotal in the conviction of Montt. Together Beatriz Manz, a social anthropologist and international eyewitness, Elizabeth Oglesby, a geographer, Clyde Collins Snow, an anthropology and archaeology consultant, and several others of different disciplines were able to bring the first …show more content…
The standards which most anthropologists use are based off of European and American measurements. Kimmerle states that when applying one standard to a specific population results vary for three reasons: “different populations grow, develop, or age differently from one another due to environmental and genetic factors… may result as statistical artifacts depending on the reference population and particular statistical methodology that is used… [and] inter-observer variation” (Kimmerle 2004). In the case of human rights violations during and after the Spanish Civil War, Ferllini notes that research has begun to using different diagnostic criteria, aiming to find specific population biological parameters for identification (Ferllini 2014, 69). However, she also points out that many of these human rights investigations rely on volunteers, due to lack of funding, who have no guidelines as to which standards are applied, which can lead to discrepancies in court cases (2014,