Adapting forensic case reporting to account for marginalization and vulnerability

Abstract

Scholarship of forensic sciences has shown politicalization of human remains and potential biases in criminal investigations. Specifically, concerns have been raised regarding how forensic anthropology analysis and documentation may hinder identification processes or obfuscate other data. As part of this scholarship, some have suggested that forensic anthropologists expand their reporting to include broader public health and safety information as well as reconsider who should be included in reports of anthropological findings. In response to these burgeoning discussions, this piece provides examples of ways anthropologists may formulate reports that capture evidence of marginalization or structural vulnerability. Documentation of findings can occur in myriad formats, including, but not limited to, individual case reports, reports on population analyses from cases, collaborative end-of-year reporting conducted with other medicolegal professionals, and collaborative databasing. This piece provides various templates and suggestions for reporting this kind of data while encouraging further discussion on related merits and concerns.

Keywords

• Structural vulnerability
• Violence
• Forensic anthropology
• Case reports
• Marginalization