This collection of 9 papers is drawn from a series of seminars held at the Wellcome Unit for the History of Medicine in Oxford in 2007. Rather than attempt to present a number of papers on a single factual topic or a number of closely related topics, the organisers instead chose to draw on an admirably wide range of subjects over the time span of the title. The focus of investigation here is the relationship between medical professionals and the law in the context of the development of laws and legislation. Whilst many such publications invite the reader to ‘dip in’ selectively, this collection manages to present coherent themes that resonate in many of the papers despite their diverse individual topics.
As the editors make clear in their introduction, it is important to see the relationship between law and medicine here as a multifaceted, plural set of encounters. As the title makes clear, different legal arenas are under examination. The role of medicine is examined in the context of the trial process, the legislative regulation of medical argument and the legal sanctioning of medical acts. This review is too small a space to accurately reflect all of the contributions or everything contained in them but some common themes can be drawn out in summary.
Often the picture that the reader is left with is one where authority over medical knowledge is cast into a legal setting where those who are furthest from understanding the truths and intricacies of medical practice are left with the real power to anoint or relegate medical actions. This model reappears in very different eras and in connection with many diverse subjects. In the opening paper, Catherine Kelly outlines the effect that the militarisation of medicine and medical practice, as a result of the Napoleonic Wars, went on to have in the construction of medical argument before various parliamentary inquiries, chiefly those into opthalmia and the plague. Here, the contested medical knowledge is left in the hands of such Inquiries and certainly in the context of the gradual professionalisation and emergence of the modern medical profession in the years following her study it is an interesting example of a middle ground between the orthodox and unorthodox practitioner that is often the subject of study in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries.
Perhaps more so than law, medical science is a forward thrusting enterprise that throws up much in the way of novel procedures and ethical challenges. In the papers that deal with such subjects (Duncan Wilson's on the modern legal regulation of human tissue and Imogen Goold's on the regulation of artificial reproduction 1978–1985) the distance between medical and legal thought in novel situations is obvious. Medical practitioners' lack of awareness as to the potential legal implications of their actions and their own exasperation at the failure of those involved in law making to share their vision of the role of medicine both recur.
Particularly interesting is Katerine D. Watson's paper on prosecuting vitriol-throwing in the nineteenth century which investigates the tension between medical and legal assessment of the term ‘wound’ contained in Lord Ellenborough's Act. The background of the growth of medico-legal or forensic science within the UK in the same period is unmistakably clear. This wider context of the solidification and unionising of the various strands of the medical profession is visible in a very different context in Angus Ferguson's paper on the effective failure of the profession to ensure legal protection for medical confidentiality, a particular problem in the context of divorce cases which, as the author notes, may precisely be due to that rising status of medicine and the increased utility of medical knowledge that came hand in hand with it.
A noticeable undercurrent is the different approaches taken to both legal and medical practice north of the border with two of the papers directly addressing Scottish matters and a third doing so in passing. So the reader is treated in Gayle Davies' paper to the peculiarities in the legal regulation of abortion in Scotland that, although generally underexploited and misunderstood, allowed pioneering medical practitioners in Aberdeen to safely adopt a more liberal approach in the years preceding the 1967 Act. Equally, through access to pleading records, Roger Davidson's paper on the treatment of homosexual offenders 1950–1980 identifies a number of different modes of legal outcome depending largely on the medical assessment of the accused's sexuality. Watson's paper reveals a stark distinction in the successful prosecution of vitriol-throwing north and south of the border.
Alongside the obvious interdisciplinary research required for many of the papers, another commendable feature is the range of methodologies on display, with a number of the papers acting as examples of the balance between wider historical and legal research that serious legal history requires. Often this is best represented in understanding not just the limits of what the formal legal sources can tell us but also in contextualising the legal evidence within a wider social context. In this vein James Hanley's study of the statutory framework surrounding the use of municipal council bye laws as a vehicle for protecting or promoting public health and dealing with public nuisances uncovers the potential for tension and dispute between municipalities and central government.
In summary, this slim volume is a fascinating collection of papers, each of which reflects well the overall theme of the work. Those interested in the specific issues covered will of no doubt find much to explore.
The editors note that the relationship between law and medicine (each understood intellectually, professionally and institutionally) in the context of law making is a much under researched topic and should be justly proud that their work presents a collection that breaks much new ground in this area. As such it will be of interest to those working in both the fields of legal and medical history along with socio-legal scholars interested in these interfaces between law and medicine.
