SpringerLink
Log in

Disaster Victim Identification: Traditional Approaches and Changing Practices

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Essentials of Autopsy Practice

Abstract

A vital component of disaster management is the identification of the deceased. This chapter discusses the processes created by the International Criminal Policing Organization (INTERPOL) to undertake and standardize the disaster victim identification (DVI) process. Following a brief description of the basics of personal identification which involves the comparison of information about the individual when they were alive (ante-mortem data) with information obtained during the post-mortem examination of the deceased person (post-mortem data), a summary of each of the five phases of DVI as outlined in the INTERPOL DVI Guide is provided. The impact of different types and scales of disasters on identification is then discussed. The next part of the chapter examines some of the changes in practice that have occurred recently. Particular attention is given to technological advances that have improved processes at the scene (phase 1); practice in the mortuary (phase 2) including the implementation of medical imaging, and advances in dental, DNA and fingerprint identifications; the collection of ante-mortem data (phase 3), and the reconciliation of data (Phase 4). While DVI has focused on so-called primary methods of identification, the potential value of so-called secondary identification methods is discussed. The preservation of human remains following a disaster will be dependent on the type of disaster. However, there are numerous examples of disasters which have resulted in severely fragmented, compromised and/or commingled human remains. For this reason, the challenges associated with the recovery and management of fragmented human remains is considered. The final part of the chapter discusses the importance of debriefing (phase 5) following a disaster and acknowledges the potential mental and physical impact of the work on those involved in DVI operations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
EUR 29.95
Price includes VAT (Germany)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
EUR 42.79
Price includes VAT (Germany)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
EUR 53.49
Price includes VAT (Germany)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free ship** worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
EUR 53.49
Price includes VAT (Germany)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free ship** worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights, Art. 24(2), 999 U.N.T.S. 171;(1966).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Universal Declaration of Human Rights, G.A.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Blau S, Hill T. Disaster victim identification: a review. Minerva Medicoleg. 2009;129:35–46.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Ranson D. The role of forensic pathology in bereavement support and in promoting public health through a modern medical death investigation system. Grief Matters Austr J Grief Bereavem. 2016;19(2):41–6.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Interpol. Interpol Disaster Victim Identification Guide. Interpol Working Group on Disaster Victim Identification;2018.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Sweet OCD. INTERPOL DVI best-practice standards—An overview. Forens Sci Int. 2010;201(1):18–21.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Jackson G, Jones S, Booth G, Champod C, Evett IW. The nature of forensic science opinion—a possible framework to guide thinking and practicce in investigation and in court proceedings. Sci Justice. 2006;46(1):33–44.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Berger EH, van Wijk M, de Boer HH. Bayesian inference in personal identification. In: Obertová Z, Stewart S, Cattaneo C, editors. Statistics and probability in forensic anthropology. London: Academic Press;2020. p. 326–37.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Mundorff AZ, Black S, Blau S, Drawdy SM, Kosalka Shore RC. Disaster Victim Management—the role of the anthropologist. In: Payne-James J, Byard RW, editors. Encyclopedia of Forensic and Legal Medicine. 2nd ed. London: Elsevier; 2016. p. 288–304.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Mundorff AZ. Anthropologist-directed triage: three distinct mass fatality events involving fragmentation of human remains. In: Adams B, Byrd J, editors. Recovery, Analysis, and Identification of Commingled Human Remains. Totowa: Humana Press; 2008. p. 123–44.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  11. O’Donnell C, Iino M, Mansharan K, et al. Contribution of postmortem multidetector CT scanning to identification of the deceased in a mass disaster: experience gained from the 2009 Victorian bushfires. Forensis Sci Int. 2011;205:15-28.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Iino M, Aoki Y. The use of radiology in the Japanese tsunami DVI process. J Forensic Radiol Imaging. 2016;4:20–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Taylor J. A brief history of forensic odontology and disaster victim identification practices in Australia. J Forensic Odontostomatol. 2009;27(2):64–74.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Zikir A, Manica S. Forensic dentistry and disaster victim identification (DVI) in Indonesia. Aust J Forensic Sci. 2021;53(1):75–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. de Souza MA, Urtiaga GdO, Ferreira RCG, da Silva LM, Umbelino JKG, de Melo FR, et al. Friction ridge analysis in disaster victim identification (DVI): Brazilian case studies. Forensic Sci Res. 2021:1–7.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Montelius K, Lindblom B. DNA analysis in disaster victim identification. Forensic Sci Med Pathol. 2012;8(2):140–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. De Valck E. Major incident response: collecting ante-mortem data. Forensic Sci Int. 2006;159:S15–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Forrest A. Forensic odontology in DVI: current practice and recent advances. Forensic Sci Res. 2019;4(4):316–30.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Kahana T, Grande A, Tancredi DM, Penalver J, Hiss J. Fingerprinting the deceased: traditional and new techniques. J Forensic Sci. 2001;46(4):908–12.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Sozer AC. DNA analysis for missing person identification in mass fatalities. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2014.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  21. Bassed R, Leditschke J. Forensic medical lessons learned from the Victorian bushfire disaster: recommendations from the phase 5 debrief. Forensic Sci Int. 2011;205:73–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Winskog C, Tonkin A, Byard RW. The educational value of disaster victim identification (DVI) missions—transfer of knowledge. Forensic Sci Med Pathol. 2012;8(2):84–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Archer F, Spencer C, McArdle D, Cross S, Boyd L. Emergency management evaluations: beyond the lessons-learned paradigm. Austr Emerg Manag Instit;2021. 33–4.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Landahl MR, Muffet-Willett SL. Preparedness and planning for law enforcement operations. In: Landahl MR, Thornton TE, editors. The role of law enforcement in emergency management and homeland security. Community, environment and disaster risk management, vol. 24, Emerald Publishing Limited;2021. p. 171–91.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Blau S, Robertson S, Johnston M. Disaster Victim Identification: new applications for postmortem computed tomography. J Forensic Sci. 2008;53(4):1–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Wright K, Mundorff A, Chaseling J, Forrest A, Maguire C, Crane DI. A new disaster victim identification management strategy targeting “near identification-threshold” cases: experiences from the Boxing Day tsunami. Forensic Sci Int. 2015;250(null):91–7.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Przybyłowski M. Problematic aspects of the identification of the dead bodies of aviation crash victims in Poland. The role of the forensic medicine expert in an external examination group and a Disaster Victim Identification (DVI) team. Arch Med Sadowej Kryminol. 2020;70(2–3):136–48.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Arrighi E, Charlot AM. Identifying terrorist attack victims. Forensic Sci Res. 2020;5(3):236–41.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Cordner SM, Woodford N, Bassed R. Forensic aspects of the 2009 Victorian bushfires disaster. Forensic Sci Int. 2011;205(1–3):2–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Winskog C, Tsokos M, Byard RW. The progression from disaster victim identification (DVI) to disaster victim management (DVM): a necessary evolution. Forensic Sci Med Pathol. 2012;8(2):81–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Acharya J, Shrestha R, Shrestha PK, Kanchan T, Krishan K. When protocols become fairy tales and gods remain buried under: excerpts from the diary of forensic experts at Ground Zero during the Mega Quake that hit Nepal. Am J Forensic Med Pathol. 2017;38(1):5–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Lovell D, Vella K, Muñoz Sáez D, McKague M, Brereton M, Ellis P. Exploring technologies to better link physical evidence and digital information for disaster victim identification. Forensic Sci Res. 2022.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Olivieri L, Mazzarelli D, Bertoglio B, De Angelis D, Previderè C, Grignani P, et al. Challenges in the identification of dead migrants in the Mediterranean: the case study of the Lampedusa shipwreck of October 3rd 2013. Forensic Sci Int. 2018;285:121–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Reinke R, Anderson BE. Missing in the US–Mexico Borderlands. In: Congram D, editor. Missing persons: multidisciplinary perspectives on the disappeared. Toronto: Canadian Scholars’ Press; 2016. p. 249–68.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Ranson D. The loss of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17: a forensic and humanitarian task. J Law Med. 2015;22(4):745–50.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Ramesh AC, Kumar S. Triage, monitoring, and treatment of mass casualty events involving chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear agents. J Pharm Bioallied Sci. 2010;2(3):239–47.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Jacocks J, Danley R, Green L, Gavin M. Consequence management–what do we do with the contaminated dead. Joint Center Operat Anal J. 2008;11(1):53–60.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Rutty GN, Robinson C, Morgan B, Black S, Adams C, Webster P. Fimag: the United Kingdom disaster victim/forensic identification imaging system. J Forensic Sci. 2009;54(6):1438–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Anon. Guiding principles for the dignified management of the dead in humanitarian emergencies and to prevent them becoming missing persons. ICRC;2020.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Anon. Disaster Victim Identification (DVI) INTERPOL. 2022. https://www.interpol.int/en/How-we-work/Forensics/Disaster-Victim-Identification-DVI.

  41. Ellis P. Modern advances in disaster victim identification. Taylor & Francis;2019. p. 291–2.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Levinson J, Domb A. Applying new police technologies to disaster victim identification. Forensic Res Criminol Int J. 2016(5).

    Google Scholar 

  43. Mohd Daud SMS, Mohd Yusof MYP, Heo CC, Khoo LS, Chainchel Singh MK, Mahmood MS, et al. Applications of drone in disaster management: a sco** review. Sci Just J Forensic Sci Soc. 2022;62(1):30–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Brough AL, Morgan B, Rutty GN. The basics of disaster victim identification. J Forensic Radiol Imaging. 2015;3(1):29–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Rutty GN, Alminyah A, Cala A, Elliott D, Fowler D, Hofman P, et al. Use of radiology in disaster victim identification: positional statement of the members of the disaster victim identification working group of the international society of forensic radiology and imaging; May 2013. J Forensic Radiol Imaging. 2013;1(4):218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. O’Donnell C, Iino M, Mansharan K, Leditscke J, Woodford N. Contribution of postmortem multidetector CT scanning to identification of the deceased in a mass disaster: experience gained from the 2009 Victorian bushfires. Forensic Sci Int. 2011;205(1–3):15–28.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. De Boer HH, Maat GJR. The Dutch approach in Disaster Victim Identification. J Forensic Med Conflict Disast Human Situat. 2016;59(1):85–91.

    Google Scholar 

  48. de Jong LW, Legrand L, Delabarde T, Hmeydia G, Edjlali M, Hamza L, et al. Experience with postmortem computed tomography in the forensic analysis of the November 2015 Paris attacks. Forensic Sci Res. 2020;5(3):242–7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  49. Rutty GN, Biggs MJP, Brough A, Morgan B, Webster P, Heathcote A, et al. Remote post-mortem radiology reporting in disaster victim identification: experience gained in the 2017 Grenfell Tower disaster. Int J Legal Med. 2020;134:637–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Hofman P, Alminyah A, Apostol M, Boel LWT, Brough A, Bouwer H, et al. Use of post-mortem computed tomography in disaster victim identification. Updated positional statement of the members of the disaster victim identification working group of the International Society of Forensic Radiology and Imaging; July 2019. J Forensic Radiol Imaging 2019;19:100346.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Souza LA Jr, Marana AN, Weber SAT. Automatic frontal sinus recognition in computed tomography images for person identification. Forensic Sci Int. 2018;286:252–64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Mundorff AZ, Vidoli G, Melinek J. Anthropological and radiographic comparison of vertebrae for identification of decomposed human remains. J Forensic Sci. 2006;51(5):1002–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Verna E, Piercecchi-Marti MD, Chaumoitre K, Bartoli C, Leonetti G, Adalian P. Discrete traits of the sternum and ribs: a useful contribution to identification in forensic anthropology and medicine. J Forensic Sci. 2013;58(3):571–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Verna E, Piercecchi-Marti MD, Chaumoitre K, Adalian P. Relevance of discrete traits in forensic anthropology: from the first cervical vertebra to the pelvic girdle. Forensic Sci Int. 2015;253(134):e1-7.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Rutty G, Alminyah A, Apostol M, Boel L, Brough A, Bouwer H, et al. Positional Statement radiology disaster victim identification reporting forms. J Forensic Radiol Imaging 2018;15.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Pretty IA, Sweet D. A look at forensic dentistry–Part 1: the role of teeth in the determination of human identity. Br Dent J. 2001;190(7):359–66.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Al-Amad SH. Dental evidence as a sole human identifier in world disasters. A literature review with emphasis on the 2004 tsunami disaster. Arab J Forensic Sci Forensic Med. 2018;1(7).

    Google Scholar 

  58. Nguyen E, Doyle E. Dental post-mortem computed tomography for disaster victim identification: a literature review. J Forensic Radiol Imaging. 2018;13:5–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Thali MJ, Markwalder T, Jackowski C, Sonnenschein M, Dirnhofer R. Dental CT imaging as a screening tool for dental profiling: advantages and limitations. J Forensic Sci. 2006;51(1):113–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Heinrich A, Schwark T, Simeoni E, Wurmb-Schwark N. Genetic identification of fire deaths. Forensic Sci Int Genet Suppl Ser. 2009;2:253–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Owen R, Bedford P, Leditschke J, Schlenker A, Hartman D. Post mortem sampling of the bladder for the identification of victims of fire related deaths. Forensic Sci Int. 2013;233(1–3):14–20.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. de Boer HH, Maat GJR, Kadarmo DA, Widodo PT, Kloosterman AD, Kal AJ. DNA identification of human remains in Disaster Victim Identification (DVI): an efficient sampling method for muscle, bone, bone marrow and teeth. Forensic Sci Int. 2018;289:253–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Turingan RS, Brown J, Kaplun L, Smith J, Watson J, Boyd DA, et al. Identification of human remains using Rapid DNA analysis. Int J Legal Med. 2020;134(3):863–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Cornelis S. Forensic Lab-on-a-Chip DNA analysis. Ghent University;2019.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Erlich H, Calloway C, Lee SB. Recent developments in forensic DNA technology. In: Erlich H, Stover E, White TJ, editors. Silent witness: forensic DNA analysis in criminal investigations and humanitarian disasters. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2020. p. 105–27.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  66. Wickenheiser R, Sozer A. Disaster Victim Identification (DVI): rapid DNA response operations workshop. Forensic Sci Int Synergy. 2019;1:S1–2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Tamisier L, Nicolas T, Prat L, Malo M, Ledroit P. The fingerprint disaster victim identification toolkit: from powder to biometrics. JFI. 2019;69:2019–413.

    Google Scholar 

  68. Knobel GJ. Taking fingerprints from a decomposed body using the “indirect cadaver hand skin-glove method.” S Afr Med J. 2005;95(9):665–6.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Johnson BT, Riemen JAJM. Digital capture of fingerprints in a disaster victim identification setting: a review and case study. Forensic Sci Res. 2019;4(4):293–302.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Bikker J. Disaster victim identification in the information age: the use of personal data, post-mortem privacy and the rights of the victim’s relatives. SCRIPTed. 2013;10:1(1):57.

    Google Scholar 

  71. Alsalamah S, Alqahtani S, Aschheim K, Alimam A, AlAdullatif A, AlAmri A, et al. Towards a unified blockchain-based dental record ecosystem for disaster victims identification. 2019.

    Google Scholar 

  72. Torpet LA. DVI System International: software assisting in the Thai tsunami victim identification process. J Forensic Odontostomatol. 2005;23(1):19–25.

    Google Scholar 

  73. Slooten K. Validation of DNA-based identification software by computation of pedigree likelihood ratios. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2011;5(4):308–15.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Salado Puerto M, Abboud D, Baraybar JP, Carracedo A, Fonseca S, Goodwin W, et al. The search process: Integrating the investigation and identification of missing and unidentified persons. Forensic Sci Int Synerg. 2021;3: 100154.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  75. de Boer HH, Obertová Z, Cunha E, Adalian P, Baccino E, Fracasso T, et al. Strengthening the role of forensic anthropology in personal identification: Position statement by the Board of the Forensic Anthropology Society of Europe (FASE). Forensic Sci Int. 2020;315: 110456.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Blau S. Missing persons investigations and identification: Issues of scale, infrastructure, and political will. In: Morewitz SJ, Sturdy Colls C, editors. Handbook of Missing Persons. Switzerland: Springer; 2016. p. 227–35.

    Google Scholar 

  77. Baraybar J-P. When DNA is not available, can we still identify people? Recommendations for best practice. J Forensic Sci. 2008;53(3):533–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Blau S, Sterenberg J. The use of forensic archaeology and anthropology in the search and recovery of buried evidence. In: Payne-James J, Byard R, editors. Encyclopaedia of forensic and legal medicine. 2nd ed. London: Elsevier; 2015. p. 236–45.

    Google Scholar 

  79. Dirkmaat DC. Forensic anthropology at the mass fatality incident (commercial airliner) crash scene. In: Dirkmaat DC, editor. A companion to forensic anthropology. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons;2012. p. 136–56.

    Google Scholar 

  80. de Boer HH, Roberts J, Delabarde T, Mundorff A, Blau S. Disaster victim identification operations with fragmented, burnt, or commingled remains: experience-based recommendations. Forensic Sci Res. 2020;5(3):191–201.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  81. Gabriel R, Ferrando L, Cortón ES, Mingote C, García-Camba E, Liria AF, et al. Psychopathological consequences after a terrorist attack: an epidemiological study among victims, the general population, and police officers. Eur Psychiatry. 2007;22(6):339–46.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Perrin MA, DiGrande L, Wheeler K, Thorpe L, Farfel M, Brackbill R. Differences in PTSD prevalence and associated risk factors among World Trade Center disaster rescue and recovery workers. Am J Psychiatry. 2007;164(9):1385–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Misra M, Greenberg N, Hutchinson C, Brain A, Glozier N. Psychological impact upon London Ambulance Service of the 2005 bombings. Occup Med (Lond). 2009;59(6):428–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  84. Wilson LC. A systematic review of probable posttraumatic stress disorder in first responders following man-made mass violence. Psychiatry Res. 2015;229(1–2):21–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Motreff Y, Baubet T, Pirard P, Rabet G, Petitclerc M, Stene LE, et al. Factors associated with PTSD and partial PTSD among first responders following the Paris terror attacks in November 2015. J Psychiatr Res. 2020;121:143–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. Deahl M. Psychological debriefing: controversy and challenge. Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2000;34(6):929–39.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Victorian Institute of Forensic Medicine / Department of Forensic Medicine, Monash University Victoria, Southbank, VIC, Australia

    Soren Blau, David Ranson & Hans de Boer

Authors
  1. Soren Blau
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. David Ranson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hans de Boer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Soren Blau .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. East Midlands Forensic Pathology Unit, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK

    Guy N. Rutty

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Blau, S., Ranson, D., de Boer, H. (2022). Disaster Victim Identification: Traditional Approaches and Changing Practices. In: Rutty, G.N. (eds) Essentials of Autopsy Practice. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-11541-7_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-11541-7_6

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-11540-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-11541-7

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation