The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1903-10-26
NEW YORK VS.. INDIANA.


To the Editor OF the Indianapolis Journal
1t seems to me that the New York law
for suppressing Christian Science is much
more equitable and just than our Indiana
law. 1t aims at the punishment of the
really guilty party, while our law on that
subject aims at the innocent ones. In New
York it is assumed to be criminal neglect
for father to allow his child to die with
out the aid of regularly licensed doctor.
The Court of Appeals of that State has
just ruled in a case in which a father,
who was and is a believer in Christian
Science, neglected to call in licensed
doctor to his sick child and the child died.
The court held this to be criminal negli-
gence under the law, which seems to
assume that no child ever dies that is
attended by a union doctor holding a GER
tificate or card Of his belonging to the
utilization of doctors, which is organized
for mutual protection. Just what the law
would do If the father had been sick and.
trusting to Christian Science healerS, had
died, am not informed. Perhaps he would
have been inquested by the coroner, who
and there the case would have ended, as
there is no penalty for suiciding which the
court can order.
Our law, on the other hand. aims to
punish the healer, letting the one who is
responsible for not calling a licensed doc
tor go unpublished; whereas, the healer is
only rendering an act of humanity in what
he or she does when called in. The case of
Miss Prunk, lately fined by our Criminal
Court, is an illustration of the laws work.
ings. 1t appeared in the evidence that an
intelligent woman, who is a believer i'm
Christian Science and who was about to
be confined, sent for Miss Prunk trained
nurse of much experience and skill. to be
with her during her confinement, to render
such aid as circumstances might require
One would think there was nothing wrong
in this, so far as Miss Prunk was con-
cerned. But the evidence developed a crime
In the woman, back of that, according to
the New York law, but which is no crime
under the Indiana law. Having suffered
greatly IN the birth of a former child
under the treatment of licensed DOCTOR
in having tedious labor and slow and
painful recovery, she made up her mind
Accordingly, day or so before her con-
finement, she sent for Mrs. Dorland a
professional healer in Christian Science
as is quite common with all prospective
mothers who employ licensed doctors as
midwives. But Mrs. Dorland, instead of
bleeding the woman. as some licensed doc
in earlier times, and administering some
drug supposed to prepare the bowels for
the ordeal. Mrs. DorIan1 only demon
strated whatever that Island left, to be
week or so later, when the child
was breathing its last from pneu-
mOnid- fOT answering IneSe two calls
Mrs. Dorland is under Indictment while
the mother is unmolested In New York
she would be punished for not sending for
licensed physician to prepare her for the
ordeal by whatever method his particular
school of medicine now prescribes-for no
two Of the four or five schools which
are in the combine" against Christian
Science prescribe alike. Whether any one
would have bled her as the regulars used
to do / cannot tell. And. under the New
York law, she would be punished for not
having a licensed doctor at the birth of the
child and again at its death, to see that 1t
died regularly and not to trouble the cor
oner with inquest.
The evidence in the case of Miss Prunk
showed that she was faithful and skillful
as a nurse, and that labor was short and
comparatively painless, and that, finding
herself alone-that is, without a licensed
doctor-she did what neighbor women are
doing every day in the absence of a doc
tor and without license from the doctors
union. She took the child, bathed and
dressed it, and left later. leaving mother
and child doing we'll. For this act of hu-
mainly, which she could not have refused
to do under the circumstances. she was
fined Certainly the New York law is
preferable. That woman neglected to call
in a licensed doctor, and Miss Prunk only
acted the part of nurse, just what thou
sands of women are doing every day in the
absence of doctor. Our Indiana law must
be amended so as TO punish the negligent
ones who make such duty matter of
pure humanity. L. L. SEE.
/ INDIANAPOLIS. Oct. "a.