CORONERS AND DOCTORS.

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 520, 29 May 1909, Page 13

CORONERS AND DOCTORS.

■■■'~■'.', '. ■'■"■'?,.,...',' -.»',.■:.'.;.''•':'•■,",■.'.',"- : ■;■ '"MEDIOAL MEN DISCUSS'/THEIR •"•• ■■'::?■■ ■■■■■■; POSITION; Sir • Victor Horsley, having caught a severe, chill," was too. unwell to open the debate held on March 22-at the Medical, Society of London .on. the relation between coroners and modical men.' In his absence Mr. »W. G. Sponcer delivered the opening speech, , Mr. Spencer explained that tfhe chief cause of, tho differences which had between coroners and medical 1 men was due to differences in the education which formed the legal and the medical minds. - Tho objects, again, which the-legal and the "medical professions had in ' wishing to determine the cause of death were totally different.; The legal mind was fostered on tradition'and authority, two ideas absent from and oven inimical to the medical mind, but despite itself the law was becoming more and more' immersed in the flood;Of modern science and medicine.' . ' "'Death certification," Mr. Spencer '-■ continued,''''depends oh medioal 'nomenclature; upon medical nomenclature arebased medical'statistics,, and upon medical statistics are; built up the_ policies regarding public health and preventive medicine,, which constitute themost satisfactory work of .modern statesmen. The correct findings'-of the cause of .'death''are linked up with the best Acts of, Parliament.". '." •.'.' '."'■ Mr. Spencer then referred to "that hoary, institutionj the coroner's jury," ■■ and contended that the members as a body were usually/ignorant of :the : meaning of the words ,thoy. Heard ,and used. He compared them to the now. obsolete, jury of British 'matrons. On exceptional ocoaaions a medical man might find nis idea of duty diverging from that of tho ooronor. It was said that the law of England demanded full informa■tion from-the medioal practitioner, and that this demand was positively confirmed in the Notification of, Infectious Diseases Act. If this was really so, it was unfortunate, for it was quitb certain' that though seldom 'necessary it', might, happen'.that statements, mado by a'medical man at an inquest might .do harm to the memory of the deceased, and, oause trouble and distress to his rolatives.' The medical practitioner had then to tako the responsibility of withholding certain evidence, and he might bo ; thankful if the' coroner omitted'to'send him a subpoena. • Tho discussion which followed was private, and tho press were not admitted.