I was told by a gentleman, and I hope if he is present he will pardon me, that while he had nothing to say about male gynaecologists, if he wanted one that was real harsh, and would stretch and tear and bend, just give him a woman gynaecologist; that they did not seem to have any feeling for their sex in these matters.
Now that may be not altogether so, but think for a moment if there is not some truth in it, and if it is not a proper thing for the ladies in the Homoeopathic profession to follow the suggestion laid down in this paper; to go right to work and see what more there is in Homoeopathy that has not been applied in its proper methods. Organize provers’ clubs, which you alone can do; conduct them according to your own wise methods; establish the value of our remedies in a way that none but yourselves can possibly do, and then show to the world by the practical application of these remedies what Homoeopathy can do for gynaecology.
I believe, as I am one of those who have always strongly favored ladies, that this suggestion will be taken as coming from a friend.
And so we find that Homoeopathy has done something for gynaecology. We cannot give a long row of blooming statistics here today. We might give many. The statistics are hidden in the quiet recesses of many hearts and even some of those hearts that have been most benefited know it the least; and so, if we will but take to our bosoms the truths that have been given us by Dr. Phillips and have less of our mechanical and surgical measures and more of our therapeutics-combining our Materia Medica more completely and thoroughly with our mechanical measures-in ten years from now there can be a great deal more said as to what Homoeopathy has done for gynaecology, than can possibly be said to-day.
W.P. McCRACKEN, M.D.: I would like to make a cry against the over-local treatment and to do it clearly and concisely, and in five minutes. I will give you a case. a young girl of twenty in the fall of 1873 became very ill suddenly. She was taken to old Dr. Foster of Clifton Springs Sanitarium. It was pronounced a nervous and mental trouble, and Dr. Prince, whom some of you may know, was her physician. She was there six months. In the summer of 1874, at her own request, she went to Dr. John P. Gray, of Utica, and between the summer of 1874 and the fall of 1878 she spent three years and one month in the Utica Insane Asylum under John P. Gray’s care and that of his colleague, Dr. Andrews, who has since become superintendent of the buffalo Insane Asylum.
The first time she was there was twelve months, the second time twenty months and the third time six months. She realized as well as John P. Gray did, that he considered her case hopeless, and he let her go at the end of six months, thinking that she would return soon. While she was in a comparatively good state of health, he thought she might as well be at home with her widowed mother.
In the spring of 1878 she was taken as a last resort to Dr. Robinson, of Albany-a Homoeopathic physician-who insisted upon a local examination. he assured all her friends that there was enough trouble to have caused all the nervous and mental disturbance. He grave her local treatment steadily six to eight months at a time, from the year 1878 until late brought her to Chicago in 1883. I do not mean that he was all the time giving her local treatment, but that be would treat her for a few months, dismiss her as well, and a few months afterwards the nervous and mental disturbance would return, and she would return to her physician.
In 1883-pardon me for the allusion-he came to Dr. Ludlam, of Chicago, and after carefully studying the case and carefully affiliating the remedy, he prescribed for her. He did not examine her. He gave her no local treatment and she only took twelve of his prescriptions at a dollar each. Ten years have since elapsed without any recurrence of her nervous or mental trouble.
I should also like to say a few words in a very humble way from my own office, as I only graduated in 1887. It has always been my aim and policy to try and affiliate the remedy without local treatment. When my knowledge of Materia Medica fails me, then I give local treatment, and with the result, I presume, that you all have realized.
JULIA ROSS LOWE, M.D.: It was not my intention to say anything this afternoon, but I wish to speak as to two remarks, one in the paper and one in the discussion, which attracted my attention. Speaking of Sepia restoring a dislocated uterus, I believe in remedies effecting a great deal but I think that is asking too much. I do not believe that Sepia or any other remedy will restore a dislocated uterus any more than it will a dislocated arm.
One of the speakers said that of all the heroic treatment he had ever seen, the worst came from women gynaecologists. I am a practitioner of many years’ standing. I have had in my office many women, the victims of malpractice, and only one of some twenty-five that I can recall came from the neglect of a woman physician. I have seen women sewn and torn and maltreated by men, but only one can I recollect that was maltreated by a woman physician, and she sent the patient home from her office some miles with a sponge tent. I think it was neglect.
Now this is not a criticism upon men practitioners, and I do not wish it understood in that sense. I only wish to refute, from any own ten years’ practice, the statement that was made.
J.C. WOOD, M.D.: A case, apropos to the one that was recorded regarding the effects of general treatment, after local treatment had failed. Some sin months ago, I was called in consultation with one of the best prescribers in our State, to se a young lady who was suffering from melancholia, so much so, that in idea of removing her to an insane asylum was seriously entertained. The various prescriptions had been made without avail. The patient kept getting worse and worse.
Her melancholia was of a suicidal type, and her condition was most deplorable. An examination revealed a bad retroflexion of the uterus, which was overcome by a pessary. Some two weeks ago, the patient came into my office and greeted me. I hardly knew her; and she said: “Doctor, you came to see me, some six months ago, when they were talking about taking me to an insane months ago, when they were talking about taking me to an insane asylum. I want to tell you low perfectly well and perfectly happy I have been since you fitted that pessary.”.
This was a case which could not possibly have been reached by internal medication. At least, internal medication had been given a most thorough trial. It was a case eminently proper for local treatment, and I think, as gynaecologists, we have got to discriminate in those cases. I think we should ordinary try our internal medication. I believe in the power and efficacy of the Homoeopathic remedies for these conditions, under suitable circumstances; but, while we are doing this, there a danger or an evil which is more prevalent in the Homoeopathic than in the Old School, because of the belief in the efficacy of the Homoeopathic remedies, and it is that of neglecting local examination, and overlooking and neglecting the malignant conditions.
We except to have, this afternoon, a paper upon the subject of “Vaginal Hysterectomy.” That very important subject, and very important operation, has reached a point where, if we get our cases in time, we can save goodly per cent. of them; but we have got to get them in time, and there is danger, I think, if we rely too absolutely upon our internal medication, of neglecting our examinations until malignancy comes, particularly in that class of patients approaching the so-called cancerous age; and I know, from my own personal experience, that the general practitioner relies too absolutely upon internal medication for controlling symptoms, the cause of which he should seek by local examination.
Now, I say that I believe in the efficacy of internal medication, but I was glad to hear one of the other sex get up here and proclaim the absurdity of trying to set a uterus by the internal administration of Sepia. It is such absurdities as this that make Homoeopathy ridiculous in the eyes of the public. Subjective phenomena are liable to be mistaken.
R. LUDLAM, M.D.: I cannot resist having one word on this subject, First, I want to express my thorough appreciation f the paper by Dr. Phillips, which we have been discussing. I like such a paper. We do not have enough of them. It is careful, practical, and discriminating. It is not too enthusiastic. It is sensible, and will be useful. I like the suggestion immensely as to the duty of the women in this Institute.
The crowning argument for the admission of women to the floor of our national society, after Dr. Mercy B. Jackson, Dr. Swazey, and a lot of other great physicians, who have gone to their, rest had knocked at the door for several years without getting in, was made by Dr. Carroll Dunham, and that argument was in exact line with the recommendation or suggestion of Dr. Phillips.
