The same duty applies when we consider the great amount of drugging in which the community at large indulges by its excessive smoking, particularly when aggravated by the practice of inhaling, and by the continued and prolonged use of drugs for this or that symptom, too often, unfortunately, though not always, on the prescription of their medical advisors.
There is a great lack throughout the community of any real enthusiasm for perfect health: we are only too prone to be content to follow like sheep, the unintelligent and harmful practices of the majority of our fellows.
Similarly in the curative realm, we homoeopathic physicians have special obligations.
When considering our position vis-a-vis the rest of the profession, we must never lose sight of the fact that our approach to the sick individual is a much broader and more comprehensive one than that of the dominant school. This latter prides itself on its scientific approach to its problems. One must, however, always be on ones guard against being hypnotized by that word scientific.
The scientific aspect of any phenomenon or problem dealing with humanity is only one limited aspect of that problem. To get a complete picture one must consider other aspect, such as the aesthetic, emotional, maybe religious, and above all, perhaps one might say embracing all, the philosophical approach. This complex approach to his patients problem is the one that the homoeopathic physician always strives to adopt, and so never loses sight of the ego of the patient, while at the same time not forgetting his physical make – up.
Because this approach of ours to our patients is a much broader and more comprehensive one than the much vaunted scientific aspect, which the dominant school has come to regard as the Ultima Thule of medicine, I deplore the oft – repeated request of some of my colleagues that we should forsake our philosophy and make our work as scientific as theirs. I do not mean to imply by this that we should neglect the scientific angle of our patients illness but we should always remember that is only one facet of our problem.
That is why we take such pains to diagnose our patients personality with his reaction to his environment in addition to the physical diagnosis of the case in order to arrive at our prescription for his malady. In other words, we should endeavour to lead our dominant school colleagues to our way of thinking, rather than that we should adopt theirs.
At the same time must always remember that if our philosophy should seem at any time to contradict so – called scientific laws, we must re – examine our philosophy, and if necessary modify it, while at the same time remembering that many times in the past what have been regarded as laws have ultimately been proved not to be so. Thus it is evident that we must never relax our self – examination.
What shall be the role of the homoeopathic laity?
The first thing for them to remember is that we are living in a democratic country whose government is dependent on the goodwill of the governed, and that, if a sufficient number of voters desire a certain line of action, that line will be adopted by the government.
The second thought is that there are not nearly sufficient doctors practising Homoeopathy in Great Britain to satisfy the present demand, let alone any further increased demand in the future, for this line of treatment.
Does not this seem strange, having regard to the great advantage to humanity that Homoeopathy provides? Not if one looks below the surface and so finds the reason for this shortage.
Surely the most potent reason is that Homoeopathy is not taught in the official Medical Schools, either as a pre – or post – graduate study. The London University when asked to recognize the Royal London Homoeopathic Hospital as a post – graduate Medical School, refused on the plea that as Homoeopathy was not taught in the undergraduate Medical Schools, it could not find a place for it in its post – graduate curriculum.
It is, of course, nonsense to suggest that a graduate should pursue his studies only in those subject of which he had already obtained some knowledge in his undergraduate days and should not wish to obtain information on any new or extra subject.
The University Medical Shools are enabled to a great extent through Government grants. We must therefore find some way of influencing whatever Government be in power to bring pressure to bear upon the London University to remove this obstacle to the better health of the community at large. I am quite satisfied that once this academic recognition is obtained we shave many more post – graduate students of Homoeopathy.
I believe than in a democratic community, having a universal State Medical Service, it is the bounden duty of the Government to remove all obstacles to the peoples obtaining that form of medical treatment in which they have confidence. So long as Homoeopathy is denied its legitimate status, so long must be Government be deemed to b failing in its duty to the country.
If, however, we are to achieve this desirable object of full recognition, we must all, professional and laity, be fired with enthusiasm, not only for the abstract cause of Homoeopathy, but for being partners with our young Queen in delicating our lives to the community.
When we do this we shall help to make this second Elizabethan era one to be remembered throughout the ages to come as surpassing the first Elizabethan era in that it gained not so much the economic and political leadership of the world – though that is not to be despised – but showed the way to the most healthful and spiritual way of life that all the world look notice and followed suit.
To sum up, the Role of Homoeopathy, as I see it, is to humanize the practice of medicine. By that I mean it must bring the practice of medicine into line with a reasoned philosophy of life, restore to it its artistry and rid it of all unnecessary hazards. It is to do this, not from any abstract academic sense of superiority, but in order the years to come are not those of merely another reign, but to ensure a veritable Renaissance, starting with the second Elizabethan era in which Great Britain will take its rightful place in the comity of nations as the pathfinder to a way of life for which posterity will be able to say “Thank God for Queen Elizabeth the Second and her peoples.
