The History of American Homeopathy: From Rational Medicine to Holistic Health Care

Chapter 3

Chapter 3 The Laity Speaks Out The Laity Speaks Out The spread of homeopathy in the United States came from two sources: one professional, the other, lay. The professional route went from physician to student by means of preceptorships and didactic education, and from one physician to another through formal and informal contacts. Through the first half of the nineteenth century, the greatest number of these professionals came as converts from regular medicine. By the second half of the century, the medically trained homeopath came principally from one of sixty-nine colleges organized between 1835 and 1935. The other route, via the laity, was equally important. Lay advocates were often owners of books on domestic treatment and accompanying boxes of attenuated medicines. Anxious to support their new-found healing system, and convinced of its efficacy over mainstream medicine, they used their money, power, and influence to obtain equity before the law; raise money to build hospitals and clinics; and establish departments of homeopathy in universities. In almost all their endeavors, however, they deferred medical judgment to the academically trained physician. In the aftermath of Flexner’s classic Medical Education in the United States and Canada (1910), the increased powers given to the AAMC and the AMA’s Council on Medical Education, the fiscal and legal implications of medical rankings, the abolition of separate examining boards, and the slow but steady decline in the numbers of homeopathic colleges, the laity became more vocal in expressing their concerns over the future of their healing system. Not surprisingly, many took exception to what they perceived to be the spread of adjectival medicine within their remaining colleges and the slow but incremental 63 homogenization of homeopathy into mainstream medicine. Convinced that the faculties of these schools had been beguiled by the promises of reductionist medicine and the catholicity of practice, they began taking steps to return homeopathy to Hahnemann’s original principles. AMERICAN FOUNDATION FOR HOMEOPATHY Established in June 1921 by a group of high potency physicians affiliated with the International Homeopathic Association (IHA) and led by Dr. Julia M. Green (1871-1963), the American Foundation for Homeopathy (AFH) represented the first real effort to counteract the demise of the colleges with the establishment of postgraduate education . The AFH was organized around three overriding principles: (1) the future of homeopathy depended on the cooperation of physicians and laity; (2) instruction in homeopathy should be postgraduate in nature; and (3) nationwide publicity among the laity was essential to ensure homeopathy’s “rightful place in the world.” The foundation justified its work having concluded that the existing medical organizations were no longer serving the profession or the people in the manner originally intended; that the remaining homeopathic colleges were closing due to reasons both internal and external; that few state licensing boards continued to have homeopathic representation; and that applicants for licenses to practice medicine were no longer tested on their prescribing abilities.1 The Foundation’s offices were located at 1724 H Street in the District of Columbia. Initial trustees included Doctors Alonzo E. Austin (1868-1948) of New York; Cyrus M. Boger (1861-1935) of West Virginia; George E. Dienst (1858-1932) of Chicago; Frederica E. Gladwin (1856-1931) of Philadelphia; Julia M. Green (1871-1963) of Washington, DC; Julia C. Loos (18691929 ) of Pittsburgh; and Frank W. Patch (1862-1923) of Boston. Its single lay trustee was George E. Fleming of Washington, DC. Although a cursory view of the literature convinced many that homeopathy was either dead or dying, Julia M. Green, a graduate of Wellesley (1893) and Boston University Medical School (1898), and one of the leading spirits of homeopathy, challenged the assumption, sure in her mind that the fundamentals of homeopathy were growing in popularity every day. The power of the infinitesimal had become a familiar term thanks to the influence of the media. Reflecting the 64 THE HISTORY OF AMERICAN HOMEOPATHY pulse of the Progressive Era in politics and culture, Green predicted a continuing trend toward reform in America. The value and power of the single individual was more important than ever before. Green predicted that, in time, homeopathy would gain vision, unanimity of purpose , and efficiency.2 Green dedicated herself to resolving what she perceived was a serious misunderstanding between homeopathic physicians and the laity. This misunderstanding included personal jealousies , a proliferation of dubious remedies, and medical politics. Green called for both sides to come together. Instead...