Since the early 1970s the field of forensic science has blossomed into a very public topic. For better or worse, this field, and all of its subfields, are widely exposed and readily available. A web search for the word “forensic” returns 15 million results. Forensic toolkits, activities, and popular books can be found in many stores and catalogs. Film and television are awash in medicolegal shows, documentaries, investigative reports, and more. Some of the most popular TV shows are either realistic in their language and images or even edutainment documentaries based on real events. Attorneys and law enforcement professionals report the “CSI Effect,” a skewing of public expectation, benefits, and understanding of forensic techniques. A little bit of knowledge and public perception can be a dangerous thing.

While some of it may be titillating and sensational, forensic science is a serious and fundamental topic that has become an important puzzle piece in a wide variety of archeological, anthropological, and medicolegal questions and investigations. It is the responsibility of all practitioners of forensic science to be professional and sensitive to public perceptions of the field and the impact that it has on society, education, and law enforcement.

With this in mind, it’s time to retire usage of the vernacular term “Body Farm.” The term “Body Farm” is misleading and unhelpful. It began its ascent as the title of a popular novel by celebrated author PatriciaCornwell.The difficulty with the term now is that it invokes an unsavory or repugnant image of carnage; a field containing human bodies lying about in various states of decomposition, skeletons, graves, insects, and putrescence. As a literary device or B-grade movie set it may be apt, but in forensic science, it is an utterly unsuitable term. It defiles the dignity of those who altruistically donate their body to biomedical research and paints those who seek to learn and teach the knowledge that those bodies can impart, as ghoulish, insensitive, or grotesque. There are many alternate, far more appropriate terms that can be employed to describe facilities where such work is performed. Field Station, Research Facility, Anthropological Laboratory are some that come to mind.

Proposing research on nearly any aspect of death and decomposition is dauntingly hard by its very nature. Misapprehension only stultifies the process, often precisely because of unlearned public outcries about the smell, the insects, the hideousness. Those are the properties of a “Body Farm.” Proposing or conducting decomposition or taphonomic research must be based on a deliberate, sensitive, and well-informed approach, especially when the general public is aware of such work. Furthermore, it is our responsibility and to our advantage to teach those who need to understand the true nature and purpose of this sort of work by speaking professionally and addressing misconceptions in a timely fashion. While forensic scientists may be comfortable working with human remains, to many people it may be distasteful, something only spoken of in whispers. We ought to be more mindful of our language and of the impact that our words can have.

Donald Siwek, Ph.D. is an Assistant Professor of Anatomy and Neurobiology and has been teaching anatomy for over 20 years. He can be reached at dsiwek@gmail.com.