Skull wars: Kennewick Man, archaeology, and the battle for Native American identity. [Review of: Thomas, D. H. Skull wars: Kennewick Man, archaeology, and the battle for Native American identity. New York: Basic, 2000]

"We Don't Need a Swab in Our Mouth to Prove Who We Are": Identity, Resistance, and Adaptation of Genetic Ancestry Testing among Native American Communities

Genetic ancestry testing (GAT) provides a specific type of knowledge about ancestry not previously available to the general public, prompting questions about the conditions whereby genetic articulations of ancestry present opportunities to forge new identities and social ties but also new challenges to the maintenance of existing social structures and cultural identities. The opportunities and challenges posed by GAT are particularly significant for many indigenous communities-whose histories are shaped by traumatic interactions with colonial powers and Western science-and for whom new applications of GAT may undermine or usurp long-standing community values, systems of governance, and forms of relationality. We conducted 13 focus groups with 128 participants and six in-depth, semistructured interviews with a variety of community leaders examining the perceptions of GAT within indigenous communities across Oklahoma. Our interviews and focus groups suggest that participants-through the articulation of indigeneity as experiential and relational in nature and inherently distinct from genetic notions of ancestry-resist much of the challenge presented by GAT in usurping traditional forms of identity while at the same time recognizing the utility of the technology for tracing unknown ancestry and identifying health risks in the community.

Ethical and methodological issues in research with Sami experiencing disability

Background

A study of disability among the indigenous Sami people in Norway presented a number of ethical and methodological challenges rarely addressed in the literature.

Objectives

The main study was designed to examine and understand the everyday life, transitions between life stages and democratic participation of Norwegian Sami people experiencing disability. Hence, the purpose of this article is to increase the understanding of possible ethical and methodological issues in research within this field. The article describes and discusses ethical and methodological issues that arose when conducting our study and identifies some strategies for addressing issues like these.

Methods

The ethical and methodological issues addressed in the article are based on a qualitative study among indigenous Norwegian Sami people experiencing disability. The data in this study were collected through 31 semi-structured in-depth interviews with altogether 24 Sami people experiencing disability and 13 next of kin of Sami people experiencing disability (8 mothers, 2 fathers, 2 sister and 1 guardian).

Findings and discussion

The researchers identified 4 main areas of ethical and methodological issues. We present these issues chronologically as they emerged in the research process: 1) concept of knowledge when designing the study, 2) gaining access, 3) data collection and 4) analysis and accountability.

Conclusion

The knowledge generated from this study has the potential to benefit future health research, specifically of Norwegian Sami people experiencing disability, as well as health research concerning indigenous people in general, providing scientific-based insight into important ethical and methodological issues in research with indigenous people experiencing disability.

The ancestry and affiliations of Kennewick Man

Kennewick Man, referred to as the Ancient One by Native Americans, is a male human skeleton discovered in Washington state (USA) in 1996 and initially radiocarbon dated to 8,340-9,200 calibrated years before present (BP). His population affinities have been the subject of scientific debate and legal controversy. Based on an initial study of cranial morphology it was asserted that Kennewick Man was neither Native American nor closely related to the claimant Plateau tribes of the Pacific Northwest, who claimed ancestral relationship and requested repatriation under the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA). The morphological analysis was important to judicial decisions that Kennewick Man was not Native American and that therefore NAGPRA did not apply. Instead of repatriation, additional studies of the remains were permitted. Subsequent craniometric analysis affirmed Kennewick Man to be more closely related to circumpacific groups such as the Ainu and Polynesians than he is to modern Native Americans. In order to resolve Kennewick Man's ancestry and affiliations, we have sequenced his genome to ∼1× coverage and compared it to worldwide genomic data including for the Ainu and Polynesians. We find that Kennewick Man is closer to modern Native Americans than to any other population worldwide. Among the Native American groups for whom genome-wide data are available for comparison, several seem to be descended from a population closely related to that of Kennewick Man, including the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation (Colville), one of the five tribes claiming Kennewick Man. We revisit the cranial analyses and find that, as opposed to genome-wide comparisons, it is not possible on that basis to affiliate Kennewick Man to specific contemporary groups. We therefore conclude based on genetic comparisons that Kennewick Man shows continuity with Native North Americans over at least the last eight millennia.