This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables.
Montpelier, Ind., Jan. 25, 1901.
To the Editor:
—The Chicago Times-Herald, in its issue of yesterday, contained an article on "The Doctors at Odds on Divided Fees." This appeals so strongly to a common sense of justice that I wish to take sides with those physicians who are opposed to the fee dividing scheme, and endorse as emphatically as I can their reasons for not wanting to reduce the profession to a commercial basis.Some time ago I received a circular letter, and you may well imagine my disgust and chagrin when I read it. It evidently had emanated from one who fully understood the financial side of the "fee dividing" problem. This would-be surgeon—I say would-be, as no reputable one would send out such a communication—with a great wealth of rhetorical diction, intimated the injustice of not dividing the fee with the man who had brains enough to diagnose
O'Day JC. Dividing the Fee.. JAMA. 1901;XXXVI(5):335. doi:10.1001/jama.1901.02470050039014
Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.