DISSIDENT DOCTORS
Ste,—The uninitiated reader must have found it difficult to detect the true motive behind the essay in vilification which you permitted to appear in the issue of September 29th. I have not been able to ascer- tain who Mr. Gordon Malet is, but it would seem that his pen is at the disposal of a certain bureau, run by a lady, who was once private secretary to a political personage. In any case, his article is practically a recast of a letter which appeared recently in a medical' journal over the signature of a doctor who, obviously, wrote with the connivance of the Executive of the B.M.A., and, almost certainly, with the active assistance of officials of the Ministry of Health. The bit' about Freud may be original or, of course, it may have been suggested by the Bureau. All things considered, therefore, it is safe to assume that the opposition of the Medical Policy Association to the proposals of the White Paper on Health is causing concern in these three quarters. It is surely to be regretted that, instead of reasonable discussion of the principles under- lying our opposition, the officials of the Ministry and the officials of the B.M.A. should descend to denigration of my colleagues and myself.
With regard to the charge of and-semitism, I have only to say that this has not been and is not now any part of the policy of the M.P.A. With regard to myself, it is true that where British interests and Jewish interests clash I am all in favour of the British, and this, in the opinion of some, is an unforgiveable crime. I still hold that Freud's " unhealthy obsession with sex" has had a most unwholesome influence in the already unwholesome inter-war period. Also I can surely claim that there is such a thing as Jewish ideology, just as there is British or French or German ideology.—I am, Sir, Your obedient servant, [Gordon Malet's " vilification " consisted in quoting without comment a passage from a published letter from Mr. Rugg-Gunn.—En., The Spectator.]
Previous page
