Birth control laws : $b shall we keep them, change them, or abolish themDennett, Mary Ware
History
Birth control laws : $b shall we keep them, change them, or abolish them
Dennett, Mary Ware
Birth control; Birth control -- Law and legislation -- United States
In the instance of the New York Academy of Medicine, just described,
the workings of this sort of esprit-de-corps conscience were not
without a humorous side. The several members of the Health Committee
who had previously signed an endorsement of the aim to remove the ban
on birth control information from the obscenity laws, found themselves
committed, by the adoption of the sub-committee report, to the policy
of leaving the subject in the obscenity laws. Moreover the endorsement
they had signed had explicitly averred that “the question as to whether
or not or when a woman should have a child is not for physicians to
decide,” yet by the acceptance of the sub-committee report, they
were committed to the idea of leaving the giving of contraceptive
information to the discretion of physicians and health authorities.
Loyalty to their organization superseded loyalty to their own judgment,
and they proceeded to request the Voluntary Parenthood League not
to quote them as endorsers. Some of them were careful to explain in
private that they had not altered their views at all, but that it was
not best for them to be quoted as having them or as having had them.
Their request was acceded to; their names were omitted from subsequent
lists of endorsers, but obviously they could not be withdrawn from
lists circulated previously.
All this occurred five years ago. Since that time a marked change
has seemed evident in the medical profession as a whole. A much more
keen feeling of responsibility for sound legislation has developed,
especially within the last year. In the late autumn of 1924 some
leading doctors and lawyers had conferences on the subject, and
analyzed with care all the proposed sorts of legislation which had been
devised to protect the public from harmful contraceptives and to render
access to sound scientific information lawful and equitable. These
conferences were called to determine whether wording of the protective
section of the Cummins-Vaile Bill could be improved. One of them was
held in Chicago, and one in New York. Dr. Pusey was present at the
former.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account