Montana labor news., 1938-09-08
AN OPEN LETTER
To the doctors of America:

To the doctors of America:
| was dismayed to learn that in
Washington, D. c., the medical pro-
fession is opposing socialized medi-
cine, even to the point of forbidding,
to doctors associated with it, the use
of the hospitals of the city.
You doctors have boosted that
your aim is to serve humanity. You
have told US that the thing you seek
above all else is to relieve the suf-
fering and pain of mankind. You
have persuaded us that you are not
motivated by selfish considerations.
If these things are true, why are you
opposed to cooperative medicine? |
suppose you will say that it violates
your professional ethics. | might
ask, In what way does it violate
your professional ethics?" but | am
not familiar with your code of pro-
fessional ethics. | could not carry
on a discussion of the subject. But
isn't it more important to ask, Does
not socialized medicine benefit man
kind?"
To what end does your code of
professional ethics exist? Is il of
value in and for itself alone, or is it
not rather of value because it helps
you doctors the better to serve hui
mainly? Is it not true of your pro-
fessional ethics as of the sabbath,
that they exist for man and not man
for them? If this is true, then ought
not any organization that renders
medical aid more available to all men
to have your entire support? You
medical men often complain of the
patient in that he puts off securing
medical attention until it is too late.
/ think | am in no danger of error
when / say that most of such cases
of postponement of medical aid are
due to poverty. The patient feels
that he cannot afford the expense
just then and so he puts it off to a
more favorable time. We're he a
member of some cooperative medical
association, such as that which the
medical profession is nov opposing
in Washington, he would have a
medical examination on the slightest
intimation that there was anything
wrong with him. Does not this
render medical aid more available
to men? Does not this widen your
service to mankind? Or is your de-
sire to serve humanity limited only
to those who will certainly pay?
In a system of cooperative medi-
cine unusual burdens of sickness in
one family would be borne by many
families. The family with its earn
ing power reduced by sickness
would not have to stagger along
under an increased financial burden,
caused by the need for medical at
tention. That burden would be
borne by all the families in the asso-
citation. Is not that a benefit to the
humanity it is your aim to serve?
Or do you believe that the weak
should be driven to the wall as
quickly as possible in order that the
world may be the sooner rid Of
them? All. men are benefited by
cooperative medicine. Men need not
struggle through life with their
capacity for production reduced by
a weakness that they cannot afford
to have remedied. The total wealth
of society is increased. Employers
both large and small are benefited
for the worker is more efficient be-
cause his health is better. Does MOI
this benefit mankind?
All the effect of cooperative medi-
cine is in the service of mankind
which you say is your great interest
Why then do you oppose it? Is il
because you might make less money!
Or because it would infringe on youi
freedom of action? But you say thai
your first consideration is the vel
fare of mankind. In your Oath Of
Hippocrates you swear to do that
which you consider to be the besI
for your patient. How can you con
slider it best for your patient thai
he should neglect his ills until they
are past cure; or that he should BIZ
forced to bear, with decreased pow
ers, eve greater burdens of expendi-
ture for medical aid, burdens Of
which he might be relieved through
cooperative medical associations?
Doctors of America, if you really
seek to serve mankind, why do yol
%persecute this organization which
would enable you to give yet greater
service to suffering men?
KEITH II. COOK.