Source: Medical News
Source type: journal
Document type: editorial
Document title: “Silent?”
Date of publication: 19 October 1901
Volume number: 79
Issue number: 16
|“Silent?” Medical News 19 Oct. 1901 v79n16: p. 623.|
|William McKinley (medical care: criticism: personal response).|
SILENCE may mean reserve,
it may mean chagrin, it may mean confusion. The gentlemen who did not hesitate
to criticise the President’s physicians and to offer post hoc suggestions
as to what might have been done, have kept strangely silent for the last fortnight.
There have been no further confidences to the daily press concerning errors
in judgment, nor slurs upon the attending surgeons, neither have there been
any words of apology, nor any signs of appreciation that their attacks were
uncalled for and out of keeping with the dignity of the profession.
It is needless to say that the physicians of the State and country have stood by the President’s physicians and that they in turn have appreciated the united spirit of the medical press in condemning those who so unexpectedly and unwarrantably heaped criticisms upon them.
Before the evidence was all in if praise was not forthcoming, silence would have been the more noble part, but since the oracles were so outspoken with such little data, why should they preserve silence now in the presence of the full report?