General summary of conclusions from one thousand cases of abdominal section / by Lawson Tait.

  • Tait, Lawson, 1845-1899.
Date:
1884
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: General summary of conclusions from one thousand cases of abdominal section / by Lawson Tait. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by The Royal College of Surgeons of England. The original may be consulted at The Royal College of Surgeons of England.

    20/30
    November, entirely ignored the fact that from 1842 till now abdominal surgery has grown and advanced, not in London, but in the large provincial towns of Great Britain. In the address to which I have just alluded, Sir Spencer Wells has written the following sentence:— “ I have more than once warned the profession against the capricious extirpation of the ovaries, because they are supposed to be the source of all womanly ills ; and I repeat my caution, seeing to what widespreading evils its neglect may lead. I think it a charity to lay a checking hand on an erring judgment before it has gone too far; and I would fain save our profession from the public odium which must, sooner or later, be the penalty suffered by all, if a few indiscreet members of our body act without general sanction or disregard general disapproval.” But Sir Spencer Wells’ warnings are of no use unless he will discuss and prove his state- ment, because numerous discussions have been invited, and taken place, and any kind of disapproval challenged, but nowhere has the latter been shown. It is perfectly true that a few anonymous critics have made some ill- defined and indefinite charges against something or somebody in general, and a few irresponsible utterances are on record, but as soon as specimens are produced, as soon as papers are read, the discussion and the verdict is one of entire approval. I wish, therefore, again to draw attention to the fact that a mere reiteration of unsupported, inaccurate, and exaggerated statements after repeated challenges is absurd. By the admission of his silence, Sir Spencer Wells is unable to justify his language. It is not true that anyone “removes ovaries capriciously because they are supposed to be the source of all womanly ills,” but it is true that Sir Spencer Wells and others refuse to remove uterine appendages in the most capricious fashion, or that they are unable to recognise them