Department of Anthropology, Binghamton University, Binghamton, New York, USA.
Department of Anthropology, University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida, USA.
Am J Phys Anthropol. 2021 Jun;175(2):422-436. doi: 10.1002/ajpa.24212. Epub 2021 Jan 18.
Since the professionalization of US-based forensic anthropology in the 1970s, ancestry estimation has been included as a standard part of the biological profile, because practitioners have assumed it necessary to achieve identifications in medicolegal contexts. Simultaneously, forensic anthropologists have not fully considered the racist context of the criminal justice system in the United States related to the treatment of Black, Indigenous, and People of Color; nor have we considered that ancestry estimation might actually hinder identification efforts because of entrenched racial biases. Despite ongoing criticisms from mainstream biological anthropology that ancestry estimation perpetuates race science, forensic anthropologists have continued the practice. Recent years have seen the prolific development of retooled typological approaches with 21st century statistical prowess to include methods for estimating ancestry from cranial morphoscopic traits, despite no evidence that these traits reflect microevolutionary processes or are suitable genetic proxies for population structure; and such approaches have failed to critically evaluate the societal consequences for perpetuating the biological race concept. Around the country, these methods are enculturated in every aspect of the discipline ranging from university classrooms, to the board-certification examination marking the culmination of training, to standard operating procedures adopted by forensic anthropology laboratories. Here, we use critical race theory to interrogate the approaches utilized to estimate ancestry to include a critique of the continued use of morphoscopic traits, and we assert that the practice of ancestry estimation contributes to white supremacy. Based on the lack of scientific support that these traits reflect evolutionary history, and the inability to disentangle skeletal-based ancestry estimates from supporting the biological validity of race, we urge all forensic anthropologists to abolish the practice of ancestry estimation.
自 20 世纪 70 年代美国法医人类学专业化以来，祖先估计已被纳入生物特征标准部分，因为从业者认为在法医学背景下进行识别是必要的。同时，法医人类学家并没有充分考虑到美国刑事司法系统中与对待黑人和有色人种有关的种族主义背景；也没有考虑到祖先估计实际上可能会因为根深蒂固的种族偏见而阻碍识别工作。尽管主流生物人类学一直在批评祖先估计延续了种族科学，但法医人类学家仍在继续这一做法。近年来，随着 21 世纪统计能力的发展，已经出现了大量重新调整的类型学方法，包括从颅骨形态特征估计祖先的方法，尽管没有证据表明这些特征反映了微观进化过程，或者是适合反映人口结构的遗传替代物；而且这些方法也没有批判性地评估将生物种族概念永久化的社会后果。在全国各地，这些方法在该学科的各个方面都得到了培养，从大学课堂到标志着培训结束的董事会认证考试，再到法医人类学实验室采用的标准操作程序。在这里，我们使用批判种族理论来探讨用于估计祖先的方法，包括对继续使用形态特征的批评，并且我们断言，祖先估计的做法有助于白人至上。基于这些特征反映进化历史的缺乏科学支持，以及无法从支持种族的生物学有效性中分离出基于骨骼的祖先估计，我们敦促所有法医人类学家废除祖先估计的做法。
