The law relating to medical, dental and veterinary practice / by Fred Bullock.

  • Bullock, Fred, 1878-1937.
Date:
1929
Catalogue details

Licence: In copyright

Credit: The law relating to medical, dental and veterinary practice / by Fred Bullock. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    215/344 (page 195)
    Apart from these differences in procedure arising from different methods of licensing, the disabilities resulting from erasure also differ in the three pro- fessions. A medical practitioner whose name is erased may still practise, but he cannot sign death certificates and other statutory certificates, nor hold certain public appointments, nor can he sue for his fees. But if he confines his practice to non-serious cases, and secures payment in advance, he may be even better off finan- cially than before, for he may increase his practice by advertising, he may canvass for clients, he may em- ploy unqualified assistants, all of which may be to his pecuniary advantage, though it be to the detriment of the public. A veterinary surgeon in the same case may also still practise, if he avoids the use of a prohibited title, and like the doctor, being no longer under discipline, he may extend his practice by unprofessional means. A dentist, before the Dentists Act of 1921, suffered practically no detriment if his name was removed; instead of being a punishment, it was rather the removal of fetters which hindered his prosperity in a field exploited mainly by quacks. But since 1921 a dentist whose name is removed, is by that fact deprived of all right to practise his profession. If he should continue to practise he is subject to prosecution under Section 1, even if his name was removed merely in consequence of the non-payment of the annual retention fee (Tatter- sall v. Sladen [1928], 165 L.T., 557). Disciplinary Powers confirmed by the Courts. — Decisions by the General Medical Council under the