The current law in England and Wales adopts a no-property approach to cadavers and separated bodily parts; paradoxically, it affords proprietary protection to tissue users at the expense of tissue sources. Non-proprietary frameworks hardly offer effective legal redress to tissue sources. Potentially, the law could offer tissue sources a mix of proprietary and non-proprietary remedies. Drawing from the work of the famous anthropologist, Marilyn Strathern, I argue that such a flexible and eclectic approach might be facilitated by the concept of duplex, an analytical tool that promotes divergent thinking and paradoxical conceptions of a given issue. I argue that while the no-property rule reflects a duplex on bodily parts, the duplex is narrow and ought to be conceptualised more broadly to cover the claims of tissue sources.

This Panel Session consisted of five country reports (India, Indonesia, Maldives, Thailand, andNepal) and the common issues identified during the Panel discussions relative to seismic events in the Southeast Asia Region. Important issues identified included the needs for: (1) a legal framework upon which to base preparedness and response; (2) coordination between the many organizations involved; (3) early warning systems within and between countries; (4) command and control; (5) access to resources including logistics; (6) strengthening the health infrastructure; (7) professionalizing the field of disaster medicine and management; (8) management of communications and information; (9) management of dead bodies; and (10) mental health of the survivors and health workers.