Search

Objectives: There are currently no baseline data regarding the amount and types of case reports produced by forensic anthropologists. This research fills that gap by providing data on caseloads of practicing forensic anthropologists and identifying variables that may contribute to amount and type of casework. Materials and methods: A survey was distributed to practicing forensic anthropologists (n = 364) to explore number of case reports written and possible influential factors. Questions included demographic information, employment type, institution where master's degree or PhD were obtained, type of reports written, professional organization membership, certification, graduate research focus, among others. Data were analyzed using summary statistics, a random forest model, network analysis, and structural equation modeling. Results: The mean number of sole‐authored skeletal analysis reports per year was 12.33 and field recovery reports was 2 per year. Statistical analyses identified several variables influencing case loads which included: number of fieldwork reports per year, current employment, total number of cases analyzed, age, publication record, and institution of doctoral degree. Network analyses revealed that individuals in academic settings tended to have a bioarchaeological research focus from their graduate work, whereas those in an applied setting had a focus on forensic anthropology. Further, degree institution influenced employment type. Discussion/conclusions: These data address expectations for the number of cases analyzed by a forensic anthropologist per year and set a baseline for expectations and performance. Based on these results, we suggest that forensic anthropology is underutilized in the medicolegal death investigation system and more forensic anthropologists should be employed within Medical Examiner/Coroner's Offices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: A fundamental assumption in biological anthropology is that living individuals will present with different growth than non‐survivors of the same population. The aim is to address the question of whether growth and development data of non‐survivors are reflective of the biological consequences of selective mortality and/or stress. Materials and Methods: The study compares dental development and skeletal growth collected from radiographic images of contemporary samples of living and deceased individuals from the United States (birth to 20 years) and South Africa (birth to 12 years). Further evaluation of deceased individuals is used to explore differential patterns among manners of death (MOD). Results: Results do not show any significant differences in skeletal growth or dental development between living and deceased individuals. However, in the South African deceased sample the youngest individuals exhibited substantially smaller diaphyseal lengths than the living sample, but by 2 years of age the differences were negligible. In the US sample, neither significant nor substantial differences were found in dental development or diaphyseal length according to MOD and age (>2 years of age), though some long bones in individuals <2 years of age did show significant differences. No significant differences were noted in diaphyseal length according to MOD and age in the SA sample. Discussion: The current findings refute the idea that contemporary deceased and living individuals would present with differential growth and development patterns through all of ontogeny as well as the assumptions linking short stature, poor environments, and MOD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Neolithic East Mound at Çatalhöyük, dating to 7100–5950 cal BCE (Bayliss et al. 2015), in central Anatolia is well known as a large, early agricultural village. Like other Neolithic sites in this region, the site had distinct mortuary practices, which at Çatalhöyük are dominated by primary interments beneath house floors, accounting for 83 percent of stratified individuals recovered to date (Haddow et al. in press). While commingling of skeletal elements due to repeated use of house platforms as burial locations is common (Boz and Hager 2013 ; Haddow, Sadvari et al. 2016), there is also evidence of secondary burial practices including post-interment cranial retrieval and the occurrence of loose and partially articulated skeletal elements moved from a previous location (Haddow and Knüsel 2017). Such observations suggest the practice of delayed burial for certain individuals, a pattern that appears to increase in frequency over time (Haddow et al. in press). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The bioarchaeological record of human remains viewed in the context of ecology, subsistence, and living circumstances provides a fundamental source for documenting and interpreting the impact of plant and animal domestication in the late Pleistocene and early to middle Holocene. For Western Asia, Çatalhöyük (7100-5950 cal BC) in central Anatolia, presents a comprehensive and contextualized setting for interpreting living circumstances in this highly dynamic period of human history. This article provides an overview of the bioarchaeology of Çatalhöyük in order to characterize patterns of life conditions at the community level, addressing the question, What were the implications of domestication and agricultural intensification, increasing sedentism, and population growth for health and lifestyle in this early farming community? This study employs demography, biogeochemistry, biodistance analysis, biomechanics, growth and development, and paleopathology in order to identify and interpret spatial and temporal patterns of health and lifestyle under circumstances of rapid population growth and aggregation and changing patterns of acquiring food and other resources. The record suggests that the rapid growth in population size was fueled by increased fertility and birthrate. Although the household was likely the focus of economic activity, our analysis suggests that individuals interred in houses were not necessarily biologically related. Predictably, the community employed resource extraction practices involving increased mobility. Although oral and skeletal indicators suggest some evidence of compromised health (e.g. elevated subadult infection, dental caries), growth and development of juveniles and adult body size and stature indicate adjustments to local circumstances. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Forensic anthropology in the United States is a specialization within the overall field of anthropology. Forensic anthropologists are specially educated and trained to search, recover, and examine human remains within a medicolegal context. Over time, forensic anthropology has become increasingly specialized and distinct from other specializations within anthropology. As such, we argue that forensic anthropology should be considered its own discipline, with a unique knowledge base, separate from other similar forms of anthropology, such a bioarchaeology. We argue that forensic anthropologists have unique expertise, making them the only type of anthropologist qualified to perform medicolegal examinations of human remains. Finally, we contend that to perform or represent yourself as a forensic anthropologist without the appropriate expertise is ethical misconduct. The value of this paper is that it explains the importance of expertise and knowledge, and how forensic anthropology has diverged from other specializations of anthropology enough to be considered its own discipline. This paper explores the current state of forensic anthropology in the United States as a distinct discipline. Forensic anthropology has become increasingly specialized and the need for strengthened professionalization is becoming paramount. This includes a need for clearly defined qualifications, training, standards of practice, certification processes, and ethical guidelines. Within this discussion, the concept of expertise is explored in relation to professionalization and practice, as both bioarchaeology and forensic anthropology have different areas of specialist knowledge, and therefore unique expertise. As working outside one's area of expertise is an ethical violation, it is important for professional organizations to outline requisite qualifications, develop standards and best practice guidelines, and enforce robust preventive ethical codes in order to serve both their professional members and relevant stakeholders. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]