pathtalk.org is a weblog about pathology and laboratory medicine.

Autopsy article in the New York Times

The New York Times featured a short piece about autopsies yesterday. The article takes a somewhat skeptical tone in places:

We looked at each other, my surviving sister and I, and said no. It wouldn’t bring her back. We had had enough. We wanted to get on with funeral plans. Another reason, I realized later, was a vague, underlying sense of distrust. We weren’t confident that the hospital could provide a thorough and competent autopsy, and even if it could, we didn’t trust the doctors to tell us the whole truth.

However, it does goes on to affirm the value of the procedure for alleviating relatives’ fellings of guilt after the death of a loved one, and provides some information about how to request an autopsy. It also points out that many of the real questions people have after the death of a loved one are deeper than those we patholgists are able to answer.

The Times is also featuring a “Consult” section in which two pathologists answer questions about autopsies. The comments are interesting reading.

Autopsies are seen more as ways to detect problems , rather than ways of learning. Maybe we, the people who perform them on a regular basis, should show that community how important they can are as to advancement of medical knowledge. We should take away the lawyer’s idea ( you know Autopsy+lawyer=lawsuit= MONEY!!!)