The recent Netflix series, Dahmer-Monster: The Jeffrey Dahmer Story, depicts the horrific crimes of one of the most notorious serial killers in the United States. It has proved to be controversial, as families of the victims have condemned the drama for recreating the murders of their loved ones without their permission.
However, a part of the story which makes the true life events evermore surreal is the fact that after Jeffrey Dahmer was killed, his parents fought over what would happen to his brain.
Death and dispute
After being sentenced to life imprisonment for murdering 17 men between 1978 and 1991, on 28 November 1994, Jeffrey Dahmer was bludgeoned to death by a fellow prison inmate. However, before he was cremated as per his final wishes, doctors opened up his skull and took his brain out. This was because a dispute had arisen between Dahmer’s parents. His mother Joyce Flint wanted to determine whether biological factors had led to her son’s descent into murder. Whereas his father, Lionel Dahmer, sought for the body to be cremated per his son’s request.
On 17 September 1995, his body was cremated whilst his brain was kept under ‘lock and key’ in a jar of formaldehyde at Wisconsin State University. The parents received half of their son’s ashes whilst the dispute over what would happen to his brain went to Court.
A judgment was reached in December 1995, in which Columbia County Circuit Judge, Daniel George ordered that Jeffrey Dahmer’s brain also be cremated. In his closing statement, the Judge stated:
“…I am extremely concerned about the propriety of the handling of this issue and the avoidance of exploitation…”
Although this case may be an exception to the usual practice of the disposal of a body after death, it does broach the question of who has ownership of a body after death and the disputes that may arise over this in the UK.
Right of possession
The starting point to note is that in accordance with the case of Williams v Williams (1882). When a human dies, property in their body does not vest in anyone. Therefore, although no one owns your body after death, there is a right to dispose of a body which in turn gives them a right of possession too.
The deceased may have a Will which stipulates their funeral or burial wishes. However, those wishes are not binding in law. The expectation that your ‘next of kin’ will have priority in these decisions is also not the case. In Dobson v North Tyneside Health Authority (1996), it was concluded that a personal representative has a right to the custody and possession of the deceased’s body until its proper disposal.
The right of possession over a body begins at the point of death. Another important point to note is that if the deceased’s body is infectious and the cause of death is due to a notifiable disease, a hospital has the right to detain the body. Thereafter, the coroner would be able to take temporary possession of the body to determine the cause of death.
If the deceased has left a Will, the usual practice is that the named executor is entitled to take possession of the body. In cases where there is no Will, the person who has priority on intestacy may take possession. The assumption that the deceased’s surviving spouse, child, or sibling will have some entitlement to determine what should happen after the deceased’s death in terms of burial and/or disposal is in practice true. The standard approach is that the personal representative will work together with the deceased’s close relatives to collaborate on the burial arrangements. But the final say will always go to the personal representative.
Disputes over possession
There may be cases where there is a dispute over the validity of the deceased’s Will and disagreement between personal representatives. Parties will be able to apply to the Court to decide who is entitled to make the decision over burial rights.
In the case of Lina Jakimaviciule v (1) HM Coroner for Westminster (2) Rasa Stanevicience (2019), the deceased’s daughter, Rasa, was appointed as executrix of the estate. The Court had to determine which of the deceased’s two daughters was entitled to possession of their mother’s body. Alongside the dispute over where the mother would be buried, the other sister, Lina, was also claiming that the deceased’s Will was invalid for lack of capacity. The Court was asked to decide who the body should be released to (and not the substantive claim over the validity of the Will). It was decided that Rasa would take possession as it reflected the wishes of the deceased to be buried in Lithuania.
Comment
The death of a loved one can cause emotions to run high and is sadly the time when disputes may arise over the burial and who makes those decisions. There is a hope that disputes can be resolved without going to Court but in cases where they cannot, an application can be made to the Court to determine who has the right of disposal over the body.
How can we help?
If you have any questions concerning the subjects discussed in this article, please do not hesitate to contact a member of our Dispute Resolution team in Derby, Leicester, or Nottingham on 0800 024 1976 or via our online enquiry form.
Contact us