The Waterbury Democrat., 1933-08-29
THE PHYSICIAN AS STOOL PIGEON

Headline: DIR SOMEBODY INDICTED IN HOLDUP CASES
 The story says that pr John J. Somebody | failed to notify the police that he had treated
 q patient for gunshot wounds and the grand
 special statute specifying that physician at- l tending person suffering from gunshot | wounds must notify either the local police or | the state commissioner of public safetey. | How did the rand jury learn about the l doctors dastardly conduct? Oh. another doc | tor, with whom he consulted about the case, ran right around and informed the police. A | nasty type, this stool pigeon who would betray | the faith patient puts in his doctor rather than | commit q msdemeanor. That's one of the rot | ten things about Medicine today-too many of | that type in practice.
 "Dr stoolpigeon police said, gave them in- | formation which wa5 extremely valuable.i in
 making the capture (of the alleged bandit). | He explained how the alleged bandit had | been brought to his office by Dr Somebody" Too bad can't indict Dr Stoolpigeon, for he betrayed the honor of his profession, the | confidence of his colleague and the faith or | trust of the patient.
 | Another Special" statute or regulation has | been enacted in some states. requiring physi- clans to report all cases of gonorrhea or syph- ilis. From the first this has been dead letter. because these diseases occur in all classes and the physicians can't afford to betray the con- | fdence of better class patients, you know
 The iaW recurring physicians to report such | than the observance. It doesn't require much | moral courage to break this law.
 Such "special' statutes regulations violate
 the Fundamental principles of justice and com | mon welfare. The common law has always re- | cognized the inviolable secrecy of whatever a
 physician learns in his professional capacity. especially knowledge which, if divulged might jeopardize the patients reputation or safety. Why not a special statute to punish lawyers
 who fail to inform the police when they are consulted by a client who Is evidently mixed up in some criminal affair? And another to com pei the clergyman to inform the police when- ever any one confesses any crime? ? And very special one to make useful stool pigeo..s of
 wives, mothers or other relatives who may learn of implication in crime?
 I'd Be Pretty Mad Myself l would like your best opinion of sodium suiphocyanatc as used for treatment of - by the medical fraternity I have refused to
 fill prescriptions where the patient is miles
 from the doctor. (P. s. M.)
 Answer-I know nothing about the use of
 the medicine in the condition you mention But If prescribed it and druggist refused to fill the prescription on such ground I'd be furious.
 too. It is scarcely the duty of the pharmacist to question the physicians judgment. Doctors Disagree
 Why should one doctor insist my daughters tOnsils should be removed immediately, while another assures me her tonsis do not require
 removal. She has chronic running ear. (Mrs E. S)
 | Answer-Perhaps one doctor is an old-timer
 old timers still regard every tonsil that is vis- | ible as rather menace. There is a lot of sheer hokum practiced by latter day throat
 specialists and by plodding practitioners who
 take the brass specialists too seriously. If there
 is a septic focus in either tonsl it is a question
 of fact, not of opinionsIf the doctor determines
 that the tonsi1 is the seat of infection, he should eradicate the infection az a first step in
 the treatment of the running ear But this does | not necessarily require removal of the tonsils
 believe 1t Is preferable in most cases to eradi.
 cate such focus of infection in the tonsil b,
 meals of diathe.n,y (electro-coaguiati
 which Is at least as efficient radical surgery | and both safer and less painful for the patient
 Copyright 1883. John F. bile Col