THE DOCTORS AND THE STATE
SIR,—You stand condemned out of your own mouth! Your Editorial Note to the letter under the above heading in The Spectator of Friday, April 13th (note the date!) condemns you for wasting valuable paper, ink, time and the patience of many of your readers, and also of deliberately misleading those readers as to the attitude of the majority of the doctors to the White Paper. Some months ago, after a series of particularly anti- B.M.A. remarks in your journal, I sent a letter to you for publication pointing out that the B.M.A. has been for over thirty years trying to persuade successive Governments to bring in a Comprehensive Medical Service for the Nation to no avail. Most of the articles and other references to the subject in your columns have deliberately given the impression that the B.M.A. is against such a service. My letter asked why it was that the B.M.A. always received such a " bad Press." My letter was returned with a letter from you stating that The Spectator had never been anti-B.M.A.; that it was always scrupulously fair, &c.!
My letter also pointed out that what the Profession as a whole did not like was not the ideal behind the White Paper, but many of the details contained therein.
If, Sir, you had really cared about being unbiassed my statements could have been verified by you at the B.M.A. headquarters, but it is obvious that you took no such step as your further publications continued along their usual lines.
And now you say " The fundamental question is whether there is to be a comprehensive National Health Service or not. The principle has been approved by a predominantly Conservative House of Commons and it is certain that a predominantly Labour House of Comnions would approve it still more emphatically." As far as we are concerned there is no question about it, you see we approved the principle years and years ago, but other Conservative Governments and Labour ones have not agreed with us. You go on to say " If the doctors accept this all details are matters of argument," but when we discuss those details between ourselves and with the Minister you are up in arms at once! You finish your Note with the words " but the community must have the last, word," surely the fact that we have repeatedly approached the representatives of the community, as stated above, shows that we agree to this also!—Yours For Public Relations Committee,
Previous page
