The guardian. [volume] (Boston, Mass.) 1901-1960, 1946-04-27

protection of health is basically
an unacceptable individual re-
Sponsibility which the govern
ment can assume only in en-
Urgency and never by compul-
sion, the Rev. Alphonse M.
Schwitalla, ST., said in an ad-
dress here tonight,
1t was the first time in the
current debate on the subject
that an authoritative speaker
had eXpounded a Catholic the
illogical view CT compulsory
government medicine.
Father Schwitalla, dean of
st. Louis University School of
Medicine, spoke at meeting
In the Waldorf Astoria Hotel
sponsored by the National
Physicians Committee for the
Extension Of Medical Service as
a rally of opponents of the
Wagner Murray Dingell bill.
The hill, which its anSao onists
charge would be the beginning
Of the naturalization of medi-
cine, is now on hearing before
the Senate Committee on edu-
cation and labor.
The same meeting heard DR..
Edward H Cary of Dallas, Tex
as, chairman of the committee,
picture the American physician
as a radical" by reason of the
fact that he is a scientist, un-
afraid of revolutionary change,
but fighting government medi-
cine as a change for the worse.
The third speaker was DR.. Nor
riS FiShbein, editor of the
Journal of the American Med
ical Association, who said that
medicine would mean convert
ing the great American medi-
cal profession into a "routin-
lied, clock watching bureau
crazy"
Health care is the individ-
uals responsibility" said Faith
er Schwitalla, which, within
the limits of his circumstances,
his finances and his strength,
he must carry for himself and
his dependents. This is the
real ethical basis of the pa
tent physician relationship.
"On account of social condi-
tionS, however, and their per-
sonal limitations, society's re-
sources must be called on to
assist the individual in carry
ing his basic responsibility
without releasing the individ-
ual Of that responsibility unless
he becomes incompetent to
carry it.
Government, as an agent of
society, must sometimes step in
to facilitate society's functions
in health care, not as a substi-
tute for, but only as an aid to,
the individuals efforts. Hence
government does not assume
the individuals responsibility,
but only facilitates the exercise
Of the responsibility.
"This principle makes any
form Of compulsion in health
care irrational and indefensi-
BILE and. I would say, unethical
Government, or positive law,
can re-state and re- emphasize
a basic responsibility and in
that sense stress the individ-
uals obligation, but the indi-
vidual must remain free to
choose the manner in which he
carries his basic responsibility.
Government participation in
the health and care of the indi-
vidual should be regulated by
the same principles and view
points as officially purveyed by
the individuals relationship
When the need arises through
the individuals disability, the
government units nearest to
the individual should first be
called on for help. If then the
problem is too great for local
government to solve, the larger
units of government - at first
the state units and then the
federal units are involved,
always emphasizing t h e
thought that, as far as possible,
the individuals responsibility
for his own health care and
that 'of his dependents must
be safeguarded by himself as
far as possible. Hence local
responsibility takes precedence