The response to David Horrobin's obituary is unprecedented for an obituary and among the biggest for any article. 1 At the time of going to press (8 May) we had posted 108 responses, 59 of them within a week of publication in the paper journal. We posted responses on every day but two from the 18 April, when the obituary became available on bmj.com. By comparison, legalising euthanasia and physician assisted suicide received 110 responses, and defining a good doctor 102. 2,3
“Star” obituaries have caused controversy before. 4 We published a correction to that of Dame Sheila Sherlock in the light of its seven responses. 5 In this issue we publish a prominent correction (p 1091) to David Horrobin's obituary, as well as the three shortened obituaries (above), produced at short notice for the paper journal from longer versions on bmj.com. 1
The response on bmj.com was heated—largely outrage and dismay—catalysing editorial debate on the role of medical obituaries and the ultimate tribute of a negative obituary. Respondents debated opinion dressed up as fact, defamation, and the competing interests of obituary writers and demanded a correction and an apology. As these seemed not to be forthcoming by 30 April, one respondent called for a complaint to be filed with the Press Complaints Commission. A week later another respondent reported that this had happened.
Who responded to David Horrobin's obituary? Family and friends wrote eloquently, strongly, and evocatively about the man and his work, as did work colleagues and fellow scientists and acquaintances. Some respondents attracted to the debate commented on the deeper issues evoked and the editorial ramifications, speaking both for and against the BMJ and its editor, but mostly against.
The controversy seems far from over. David Horrobin was obviously a big man, which was exemplified for me (who did not know him) in the concluding words of a former student and now full professor: “I was no longer in [David's] shadow but richer for having been.”
Competing interests: None declared.
References
- 1.Electronic responses. David Horrobin. bmj.com 2003. bmj.com/cgi/eletters/326/7394/885 (accessed 8 May).
- 2.Correspondence. Legalising active euthanasia and physician assisted suicide. BMJ 2002;324: 846-8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Correspondence. What's a good doctor and how do you make one? BMJ 2002;325: 711-5. [Google Scholar]
- 4.Richmond C. Dame Sheila Sherlock. BMJ 2002;324:174 (responses available at bmj.com/cgi/eletters/324/7330/174).
- 5.Correction: Dame Sheila Sherlock. BMJ 2002; 324: 366 (responses available at bmj.com/cgi/eletters/324/7333/366/i).