15,697
edits
Changes
no edit summary
Rogers, along with other members of the Regular sect, accepted that the state’s failure to regulate physicians permitted abortionists to prosper. An East River Medical Association of New York report discussing abortion argued that “the unrestricted practice of medicine was the main case for the existence of professional abortionists.” The report contended that only medical licensing could eliminate abortion.<ref>James C. Mohr, ''Abortion in America: The Origins and Evolution of National Policy'', (Oxford University Press, 1978), 160, citing the East River Medical Association, Report of the Special Committee Criminal Abortions, (New York, 1871), 3-4.</ref> While Rogers concluded that strengthening the penalties for criminal abortion were important, he argued that only medical licensing had the power to stop abortions. Rogers, along with most Regular physicians, believed that most abortionists could not meet even minimum medical licensing requirements. Even if a licensing board did give an abortionist a license, the state’s Regulars contended that strong licensing board should be granted the power to revoke licenses for unprofessional behavior, such as performing abortions.
Roger ended up lobbying numerous regular and irregular medical organizations including the New York County Medical Society, the Medical Society of New York, the New York State Medical Society, the New York chapter of the American Institute of Homeopathy.<ref> see Stephen Rogers, M.D., “The True Object of Medical Legislation”, ''Papers Read Before the Medico-Legal Society of New York From its Organization'' (New York: W.F. Vanden Houten, 1882), 117, http://books.google.com/ebooks and ''Transactions of the American Institute of Homeopathy 1873'', Volume 26: 524-525, http://books.google.com/ebooks.</ref> While many individual physicians opposed licensing, Rogers was able to garner support from a number of these organizations. The support of these institutions lent credibility to licensing efforts and the New York House and Senate to pass these medical licensing laws.
==Conclusion==
Ultimately, Governor John Thompson Hoffman vetoed the medical licensing bill, but this was one the earliest and most successful efforts to establish medical licensing in the United States. <ref>Stephen Rogers, M.D., “The New Medical Law of the State of New York,” ''New York Medical Journal'', Vol. XX, July 1874, No. 1: 70-72, http://books.google.com/ebooks.</ref> The medical community's efforts to pass medical licensing did not occur in a vacuum. Physicians throughout the United States were remarkably well connected. Organizations such as the American Medical Association served as a hub for the national community. State and local organizations across the country quickly became aware of the attempt by New York's medical community to enact medical licensing. In other states, medical groups would quickly follow the lead of their New York brethren. Unlike the New York physicians, they started to become successful in their efforts to pass medical licensing medical legislation. Similiarly to the physicians in New York, they tied licensing to other unrelated public health measures such as stronger anti-abortion laws or sanitary legislation.<ref>Sandvick, Clinton (2016) ''Defining the Practice of Medicine: Licensing American Physicians, 1870-1907'' (2016).</ref>
==References==
