This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables.
To the Editor:
—I feel that in justice to a not inconsiderable as well as a not inconsiderate minority, perhaps, of members of the American Medical Association who believe in the benefit of the Sheppard-Towner Act, some of the statements in an editorial in the issue of Nov. 27, 1926, should not go unchallenged.It was never represented that the reduction of infant and maternal mortality was going to be effected through "social and economic reforms." The type of work described at the hearings at the time the bill was pending in 1921—mainly, of course, the child health conference as a teaching center for mothers—is the method that is being used generally throughout the country.The proponents also never indicated that they thought the work could be accomplished in a five-year period. It represented, however, a new experiment in federal aid, and Miss Lathrop's testimony was to the effect that
Henry L. K. Shaw. THE SHEPPARD-TOWNER ACT. JAMA. 1927;88(4):265–266. doi:10.1001/jama.1927.02680300051029