Suchergebnisse

abstract: In 2023 and 2024, a wave of anti-DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion) legislation has been passed in multiple states, representing a dramatic reversal from 2019–2022, when violence and systemic injustices against minority individuals were highlighted and DEI measures increased. In forensic anthropology, where practitioners frequently work with remains of individuals from marginalized identities, these events have forced a necessary period of disciplinary and individual self-reflection regarding our complicity in the entrenched racism and cis-heteropatriarchy that underlies our society. This article reflects on the role that professional forensic science organizations play in perpetuating and/or combatting inequity. It discusses how recent anti-DEI legislation negatively impacts forensic science, hurting both practitioners and scholarly output, and the ethical responsibilities of professional organizations to publicly affirm support for minority members and contradict scientific misinformation around these legislative measures. In particular, the authors highlight how the American Academy of Forensic Sciences (AAFS) has responded—often with silence and a lack of meaningful change—and propose potential remedies to promote long-term equitable changes both within the AAFS and external to it. The role of professional organizations in supporting all of their members, and good science, is more important now than ever, and it is time we expect and demand more from them.

Over the years, the field of forensic anthropology has become more diverse, bringing unique perspectives to a previously homogeneous field. This diversification has been accompanied by recognizing the need for advocacy and activism in an effort to support the communities we serve: marginalized communities that are often overrepresented in the forensic population. As such, forensic anthropologists see the downstream effects of colonialism, white supremacy, inequitable policies, racism, poverty, homophobia, transphobia, gun violence, and misogyny. Some argue that advocacy and activism have no place in forensic anthropological praxis. The counterarguments for engaging in advocacy and activism uphold white, heterosexual, cisgender, and ableist privilege by arguing that perceived objectivity and unbiased perspectives are more important than personally biasing experiences and positionality that supposedly jeopardize the science and expert testimony. Advocacy and activism, however, are not new to the practice of anthropology. Whether through sociocultural anthropology, archaeology, or other areas of biological anthropology, activism and advocacy play an important role, using both the scientific method and community engagement. Using a North American approach, we detail the scope of the issues, address how advocacy and activism are perceived in the wider discipline of anthropology, and define ways in which advocacy and activism can be utilized more broadly in the areas of casework, research, and education.