THE MEDICAL ASSOCIATIONS VIEWS.

Press, Volume LIX, Issue 11279, 21 May 1902, Page 8

THE MEDICAL ASSOCIATIONS VIEWS.

(PB-S8 ASSOCIATION ______B___.) DUNEDIN, May 20. A full meeting of the Otago section of the New Zealand Branch of the Medical Association last night, regarding the Marshall case, resolved:— "Thai, it be pointed out that Dr. Stevenson bas himself exonerated the medical profession of Dunedin from the charge of refusing assistance in urgent cases, and _h_t the rules governing the conduct of the profession in regard to __om__>p_t_s are contained in the code of medical ethics (adopted by the Medical A-Sociation of New Zealand), which state on page 24: That there is no profession in the national code of ethics in anywise inconsistent with the broadest dictates of 'humanity, and that the article of the code which relates to consultations caimo. be correctly interpreted as interdicting under any circumstances the rendering of p_o__-______l services, whenever there is a pressing or immediate need ot them. On the contrary, to meet emergencies occasioned by disease or accident, and to give a helping hand to the distressed without' unnecessary delay is a. duty fully enjoined on every member of the profession, both by letter and by tbe spirit of _he entire code.'" It was also resolved .* "That the Medical Association regrets that the Press has thought fit to comment en a matter involving the medical profession, before* the Medical Association had had an opportunity of considering the question, and making their position c___r, objection being taken, not to the statement of the facts/but to the comment on the case by correspondents and by the Press." . Further consideration of the matter has been left over until an or denary meeting, to be held at an early date. (SPECIAL TO "THE PRESS.") DUNEDIN, May 20. The remarkab'e resolution passed by the .'Medical Association has caused a good deal of indignation, and the genera, opinion is that the Association showed an unwarranted presumption in attempting to dictate to the Press. The "Star," in a leading article, following much on the. lines of its morning contemporary, remarks: —"Dr. Davies made a very serious mistake, and must b. fxrepared to meet strong condemnatory public opinion, which' is not likely to be qualified !by the extraordinary views he expresses in his explanatory statement as to bis duties as a, meanSber of the profession— views which, we trust, are be.d by ver\ r few, if any, of his professional brethren, and whioh we .hope will be generally repudiated by them. _ Tbe regrettable character of the case is, as it stands, intensifie . by the position taken up by the doctor, - which amounts to maintaining that even where life is at stake, a doctor may decline to attend or. give his services on tbe grounds of a breach of professional etiquette, or 'because it may _.ol exactly suit him to' do so. There are ugly names-for such conduct, and they ore just now being very freely used." .