Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1888-10-31
SICK LEAVES AGAIN.
Physicians Exercised Over Certificates
to Clerks.

A little over year ago, IL viii be remem-
bered, quite a sharp controversy took place be-
tween the Commissioner of Pensions and q
committee from the medical association of this
city. 1t grew out of q rule made by Gen. Black
requiring that certificates presented by en-
ployes of the bureau for leave of absence on
account of sickness should state the cause of
sickness. The doctors protested against this
ruling, and the late DR.. Garnett, who was q
member Of the committee to which the matter
was referred by the association, wrote some
vigorous letters to the Commissioner, in which
he maintained, among other reasons, that COM
pliance with such rule on the part of a physi-
clan would be a violation Of professional eth
les, a. the relations between physician and
his patients wero confidential Gen Black
however, held his position, and the contro-
versy was transferred TO the Interior Depart
ment, and Secretary Lamar wrote a couple of
letters sustaining Gen. Black. The correspond
ence throughout was conducted with consider
able vigor, and the discussion created some feel
ing. 1t resulted in neither party Withdrawing
from the position, and the contest was declared a
draw. The Medical Association by retaliating di-
rected that members should not state in their GER
tifcates given to Government employees the
cause OF sickness, and the Department refused
to accept as grounds for granting sick leaves
physicians certificates which did not give the
nature of the sickness preventing the employees
from being at their desks. The matter has re-
manned in this position ever since, the rigor of
the rule established by the Department being
somewhat abated by admitting oral statements
from the employees in some instances.
ANOTHER PHASE.
Some Of the members of the medical associa-
ton have complained that they have suffered
loss in their practice in consequence Of this
Department ruling, and they have charged that
some members Of the profession, in violation of
the resolution adopted by that body, are in the
habit of granting certificates in accordance
with the requirements Of the Department. The
result is that such members are taking away
from the others who adhere strictly to the
rules Of the associatioR considerable of their
practice. This matterwas brought up at a re-
cent meeting Of the association, and after de-
bate resolution was offered to obtain Of the
Department the names of physicians granting
such certificates and have the list printed.
This resolution was opposed by some of the
members who had not violated the rule Of the
association, on the ground that the rule itself
was unwise. a counter resolution was offered
to rescind the rule, and in the course Of the
discussion it was argued that it was unneces-
sarJ to have such q regulation. 1t was main
tanned tnat it was
NOT THE PROVINCE OF THE PHYSICIANS
to regulate this matter, and if the order Of the
Department worked an injury to the employees
the physicians could not be held responsible.
1t has been urged that statements made by
physicians relative to the cases of their pa
tients became accessible in the Department to
number Of the employees, and in this way pri-
vate matters would become subject of more or
less gossip among the associates in the office.
In the case of ladies this, it was thought,
would prove to be unpleasant, and many Of the
doctors based their opposition to the Depart
ment exclusively upon this ground
Before decision was reached by the asso-
citation an adjournment was taken and the en-
tire matter was postponed until the next meet
ing, when it is expected that there will be a
full attendance of the members.