Article August 28, 1909 ISSUE

According to a report which appeared in a recent issue...

Alfred Farlow

Great Falls (Mont.) Tribune

According to a report which appeared in a recent issue of the Tribune, a paper read before the Montana federation of women's clubs advocated compulsory medical examination of all children who are permitted to attend public or private schools, as a means of caring for defective and diseased children and safeguarding the health of the community.

The important question is, What is the real cause of the disease which is to be detected and overcome? It should, be noted that at this particular period there exists a great diversity of opinion on this subject, not only with the various classes who believe in non-drugging systems, but with the medical fraternity as to the real nature of disease and the proper method of handling it. For this reason, to place the regulation of the health of children under government control would meet with objections from many classes, for the reason that the physician appointed to make the examination would necessarily be from some particular medical school, not acceptable to all classes. This would tend to force upon the community at large some particular system which is not representative thereof, and which would therefore amount to an intrusion upon individual privilege.

It may be said, so far as this point is concerned, that the examination by one school of physicians is likely to be in accord with that of other schools, but there is more to be considered than the mere physical condition and environment of the child in connection with his troubles. The mental condition may be far more responsible for the physical defects of a child than anything else, and physical examinations are not likely to disclose such causes. On the contrary, we think it is safe to say that in many instances they might add to the trouble by fostering unnecessary apprehensions. I am of the opinion that we should experiment first by improving the spiritual conditions of the children, teaching them purity of consciousness and conduct as a means of health and strength.

Children of tender years should be kept away, as far as possible, from the contemplation of disease. It has been demonstrated that those children who know the least about disease, and who therefore have it least in consciousness, are likely to be more healthy in body. To subject children in the public school to medical examination by school physicians begets in them a fear of having disease detected on their persons and in consequence being subject to expulsion. It compels the children to live too much in the contemplation of disease. It induces avoidable fear and dread of disease, and all physicians admit that fear is, to say the least, one of the prime instigators of disease.

The minds of children should be filled with those things that lift them above the contemplation of sickness and vice. It is quite as proper that young children in the schools should be left free from the minute analysis and discussion of disease as it is that their minds should be free from such thoughts as they get from reading "yellow" literature. I believe that the practice of subjecting children to those measures which create a dread of disease should be kept out of the public schools, and the parents should be permitted to make their own choice of a physician who shall examine their children. I see no reason why a teacher should not be permitted to report to parents any defect or disorder, whether physical or mental, that may be sufficiently pronounced as to be noticeable.

But while the proposition of the unlimited and universal examination of children may for some reasons be a good thing, I am of the opinion that the objections are sufficiently overwhelming to render the proposition undesirable. Physicians disagree widely as to the real nature of diseases, especially contagious diseases. Some declare that contagious diseases are occasioned by malignant germs, while others affirm that the germs are scavengers of malignant disease, and the opinion as to how and why disease is communicable is somewhat varied, so that there is danger at this experimental period of overlooking the real trouble which needs to be removed and taking those steps which are more harmful than remedial.

If we commence any movement toward the compulsory treatment of disease, there is no telling where we shall end. It seems to me there are at least two things which may be considered sufficiently individual not to be tampered with by the public; that is, freedom of choice of religion and freedom of choice of medicine.

Send a comment to the editors

We'd love to hear from you!

Easily submit your testimonies, articles, and poems online.

Submit