Editorial March 12, 1910 Issue

MEDICAL LEGISLATION

Archibald McLellan

The question of medical legislation which has for its purpose the curtailment or prohibition of all practice of the healing art except that by the so-called regular schools, is up again in one or two of the states, and has called out serious protests from those who can see in such legislation as is asked for by the doctors nothing but an effort to invade the individual liberty of the many for the benefit of the few. Among those newspapers which have commented on such proposed legislation is the Ithaca, N. Y., Journal, from whose editorial columns we quote as follows:—

It medical science savored less of empiricism, if its professors and practitioners were more nearly agreed in their diagnoses of disease and their methods of treatment, if those who rank as authorities would less frequently burst into print with statements that all the rest are mistaken and only they are right, if there were fewer disagreements and a more rigid adherence to the theories and rules that are laid down in the books, we might eventually be led to believe that those who write on this subject speak with the voice of authority. As a matter of fact, the whole system of medical science seems to be in a state of flux, as withess the changes in practice that are continually being made.... It would be interesting to know how far they have been influenced in this direction by their observations of the thousands of cases in which Christian Science practitioners have restored to health and vigor those who have been pronounced incurable by their physicians.

While the Journal holds no brief for the Christian Science practitioners, it frankly admits that it sees no useful purpose that will be subserved by the passage of such a law as the physicians have asked for. It believes that every man and woman has the right to choose whom they will employ in case of sickness, and it holds that the allopathic school has as much justification in asking for legislation to protect the people from those who practise homeopathy as it has in asking for laws prohibiting the practice of Christian Science. It believes that such a statute would be an unwarranted and unjustifiable interference with the rights of the individual and a severe blow at personal liberty. For those who look upon Christian Science as a delusion, there will always be enough physicians within easy reach, and no member of the Christian Science cult will ever offer the slightest objection to their employing regular doctors if they desire to do so. All they ask—and this they demand as their right—is the privilege of exercising their own preference if they are attacked by sickness.

Send a comment to the editors

NEXT IN THIS ISSUE

Editorial

THE PROMISE TO THE CHILDREN