Organ Retention and Bereavement: Family Counselling and the Ethics of Consultation

Abstract

Taking organisational responses to the ‘organ retention scandals’ in the United Kingdom and Australia as a starting point, this paper considers the role of social welfare workers within the medico-legal system. Official responses to the inquiries of the late 1990s have focused on issues of consent and process-transparency, leaving unaddressed concerns expressed by the bereaved about the impact of organ retention on both their experience of grief and on the deceased themselves. A review of grief and embodiment literature suggests that such concerns are consistent with the significance of relationship, attachment and identity within grief resolution—however that last problematic term is defined. The case example of an Australian coronial jurisdiction which has attempted to deal with some of these issues through mandating the discussion of autopsy and organ retention processes by grief counsellors with bereaved families is then provided. A distinction is drawn between these discussions and the seeking of consent. The discussion concludes by considering the ambiguous nature of the social welfare role within this contested field, suggesting that this ambiguity, while perhaps a source of flexibility in practice, may itself relate to a lack of clear information about the needs of the bereaved. This paper contributes to the development of that knowledge and offers some necessarily tentative recommendations regarding social welfare practice in this challenging arena.

Keywords:

• Bereavement
• Self-determination
• Autopsy
• Coronial Investigation
• Organ Retention
• Embodiment

Additional information

Notes on contributors

John Drayton

John Drayton is the Senior Coronial Counsellor at Queensland Health Forensic and Scientific Services. He is a social worker and engaged in PhD research at the University of Queensland