Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1959-05-31
DR.. Moss Rx Rejected
MAsAlNGyoNa @tAU

MCulChl NOuAlGlA "a bAAC WdSAl~
ington Metropolitan Area is
interested in public relations.
On the subject Of doctors
fees, he is UNDERSTANDABLE
sensitive to an ever-growing
laymen's antagonism. Every
issue that might explode into
a catalyst for an aroused
public demanding of Govern
ment controls Of the medical
profession is to be nipped in
the bud. In this context, and
from his premises, ! am SYM
pathetic to his trampling
: down Of an American consti-
tutional principle. but while
sympathetic I still protest.
DR.. TIL omas Mattingly
wrote an ironical and impru-
dent letter. But in this coun-
try he is constitutionally
permitted. within the limita-
tons of libel. to be uninten-
tionally ironic and impru-
dent. To insist that when he
uses his professional title in
dealing with a public issue,
automatically means that he
is representing the entire
medical profession is an inn
possible argument to prove.
And of course If DR.. Moss
could prove it, he would not
have written this whining
letter, but would have taken
DR.. Mattingly to court.
But beyond poor reasoning,
DR.. Moss is doing the very
worst kind Of a public rela-
tons job when he even sug-
gests that the Medical So
ciety of the District of Co
lumbia is a board Of censor
ship. The obvious implica-
ton is as starkly explicit as
Roosevelt's CLEAR it with
Sidney: IF you are a medical
man you can have no public
opinion other than the official
ANA stand" What could be
more calculated to outrage
the American public than to
picture all physicians as COM
pletely devoid of freedom of
expression Supinely awaiting
the latest press release of the
monolithic ANA. From ANA
premises the greatest public
relation job Of the hour is to
impress the public that the
medical profession is treat
ing its grievances with re-
spect and honesty and that
it does welcome and encour-
age original and nonconform-
ing positions on these burn
ing issues within the profess
sion. I contend that DR.. Moss
has dealt a serious blow to
the cause he set out to de-
fond.
George B. Begg, Jr.
\ 4 X 4
The Medical Council says it
is worried about poor public
relations for the general med
ical profession" Gag rule
never fostered good public
ENTHUSIASTICALLY when it
becomes known. And what
percentage Of the public really
believes one mans opinion is
that of an entire profession?
And to suggest that the doctor
drop the MD" from his
name when he speaks out is
to deny a man the right to
his own achievements-ex-
cept when sanctioned by "the
organization. Democracy
suffers at the hands of au-
tocracy. M. E. r.
X \ Il X
I protest the insulting as
sumption made by DR.. James
M. Moss in his letter to DR..
Thomas E. Mattingly that
union members. in whose
pockets (medical and welfare
funds his group has its
hands, cannot distinguish be-
tween an individual opinion
expressed by a contributor
to your letters column and an
official tenn emit by a
spokesman for an organiza-
ton.
While I was astounded at
DR.. Mattingly's unreasonable
objections to the 1885 charge
for repairing his washing ma
chine, / feel that his remarks
were adequately answered by
other readers. 1t was quite
obvious that his letter con-
tanned only a personal grippe,
since letters purporting to
represent the opinion of vast
multitudes of people rarely,
If ever, fail to mention this
questionable presumption.
I feel that DR.. Mattingly's
individual opinion on the
plumbers charges was not
nearly as damaging to the
medical profession as the at
tempt Of DR.. Moss. speaking