IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Context, evidence and attitude: The case for photography in medical examinations of asylum seekers in the Netherlands

Listed author(s):
  • Park, Rebekah
  • Oomen, Janus
Registered author(s):

    Can photographs of scars serve as evidence of torture? Amnesty International's Medical Examination Group in the Netherlands (AI-MEG) has, for more than a decade, been photographing torture scars to supplement the testimonies of asylum seekers who have been denied refuge. AI-MEG only intervenes at this point, when asylum seekers face extradition. Proving allegations of torture is of vital importance, as asylum seekers face rising anti-immigrant sentiment in European countries. All victims examined by AI-MEG present a combination of mental, physical and emotional scars. We summarize five cases where AI-MEG used photography in their medical examinations, and consider the ethical role physicians play in helping asylum seekers obtain refuge. Though photographs cannot capture all forms of trauma, as visual documents, they are a compelling form of concrete evidence of torture. In this way, photographs complement verbal testimonies and help doctors and immigration authorities to see and understand physical scars left by various forms of torture. AI-MEG explains in medical terms the connections between the visible late sequelae of torture and victims' testimonies. They then assess whether or not the physical scars are consistent with the forms of torture recounted by victims, using the terminology of the Istanbul Protocol (1999), the United Nations-adopted manual of guidelines that explains how to document torture. This paper outlines the medical examination process and argues for the use of photography as medical evidence on behalf of asylum seekers.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Social Science & Medicine.

    Volume (Year): 71 (2010)
    Issue (Month): 2 (July)
    Pages: 228-235

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:71:y:2010:i:2:p:228-235
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    Order Information: Postal:

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:71:y:2010:i:2:p:228-235. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.