Autopsies and Jewish Law
Contrary to popular belief, Jewish law does not have an absolute prohibition against autopsy--but there are clear restrictions regarding when it is permissible.
Excerpted with permission from Death and Bereavement: A Halakhic Perspective (Ktav).
This article provides an Orthodox view on autopsy. Conservative authorities follow similar reasoning, rejecting routine autopsies on the basis of Jewish law and tradition, but some entertain a more expansive definition of the permissibility of autopsies in individual situations where constructive knowledge may be gained. The Reform movement has two 20th-century responsa on this subject, both of which are far more permissive. The first (in 1925) takes the position that construing autopsy as desecration of a corpse has no basis in classical Jewish sources, and that even the chance of contributing to life-saving medical knowledge justifies performing one. The second (in 1981) argues that even gaining knowledge which may help others, near or far, in years ahead is sufficient justification.
The Jewish belief in the inviolability of the human body is reflected in its attitude to postmortem examinations. The Talmud (Sanhedrin 47a) asserts that the biblical imperative of speedy burial (Deuteronomy 21:22-23) is based upon the prohibition of disgracing a corpse. The scope of this prohibition extends beyond delayed burial. Scripture proscribes the inflicting of any form of disgrace upon a corpse. In general, this includes the disfigurement of the body as a result of postmortem dissection (autopsy).
Apart from the general prohibition against autopsies, which derives from our abhorrence of bodily disfigurement, there is a special prohibition against failure to bury the body in its entirety. If, after autopsy, for example, part of the body is excised and not buried, [according to one source] it is as if no burial at alltook place (Jerusalem Talmud, Nazir 7:1).
The prohibition against the performance of autopsies, however, is not absolute. An exception is made if the autopsy may directly contribute to saving the life of another patient who is currently awaiting treatment. Owing to the speed of contemporary communications, a sufferer elsewhere in the world may be aided almost immediately. Moreover, if the presence of a contagious disease, not diagnosed before death, is suspected, an autopsy may lead to the prevention of a plague. If new medicines were used on the patient, an autopsy can help to determine their life-saving effectiveness. It goes without saying that if a hereditary disease is the suspected cause of death, an autopsy may prevent the deaths of the patient's children, by establishing a preventative medical strategy for them.
Obviously, if postmortem needle biopsies or blood samples or peritoneoscopy would suffice, autopsies should not be performed at all.