JAMA 100 Years Ago Section Editor: Jennifer
Reiling, Assistant Editor.
Notwithstanding the popular jocosity on the subject, there is no special
relationship or alliance between the medical profession and the undertakers.
The latter profit by our failures and their business suffers by our success.
We can not, however, indifferently and complacently regard the recent proposal
by the president of the New York State Embalmers’ Association that a
law be passed prohibiting burials at sea. The mercenary spirit of the proposition
is evident, and its insanitary character is also sufficiently clear. The only
possible objection to a sea burial, aside from personal and sentimental ones,
is the loss to the soil of the fertilizing constituents of the human organism,
and that is too utterly absurd to notice. On the other hand, the retention
of bodies on a ship, often with very imperfect means of preservation, and
especially in the case of death from certain diseases, might be extremely
dangerous. Still, the passage of such laws is a possibility. Similar gems
of commercial cupidity appear sometimes on our law books, but they can usually
have a SORT of pseudo-sanitary or other claim for excuse, which is wanting
for the above-mentioned proposition.
SEA BURIAL. JAMA. 2004;292(17):2162. doi:https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.292.17.2162-b
Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.
Create a personal account or sign in to: