Health > European conference on rural hygiene (June 29th-July 7th, 1931)

48 -
FIFTH MEETING (JULY ist, 3.30 p.m.).
Continuation of the Discussion on Item 2 (Health Services). — Speeches bY M- Sarraz-Bournet
and M. Vimeux (France), Dr. Lutrario (Italy) ; Dr. Kacprzak (Poland), Dr. de Buen (Spain),
Dr. Vasile (Roumania), Dr. Canal-Comas (Spain), Dr. Miemietz (Germany). — Proposa s
to set up a Fourth Committee and to convene a Meeting of the Directors of European Schools
of Hygiene. — Resumption of the Discussion on Item 2. — Speech by M. Prohaska
(Czechoslovakia).
President : Professor G. Pittaluga.
Discussion of the Second Item on the Agenda.
M. Sarraz-Bournet (France) stated, on behalf of the French delegation, that, on
the whole, he could subscribe to the conclusions of Dr. Stampar’s report.
Primary and secondary health centres such as Dr. Stampar had described exist®d
in France under other names. The details supplied by the Conference of Experts and the
indications given in the report would make it possible to improve the work of such centres
in accordance with the main lines of the plan put forward.
As regards rural sanitary equipment, France also had a fairly advanced organisation,
the details of which would be given to the Conference during the discussion of item 3
There was, however, in Dr. Stampar’s report one point on which France must make
certain reservations. 1 u
If the Conference was to be successful, the recommendations proposed should be
unanimously accepted, and it would be advisable to make allowance for local ideas and
the methods of collaboration which had been gradually established in the various countries
between the public and private institutions dealing with problems of health organisation
in rural districts. Whereas in certain countries they were building from the foundations
upwards, in others it was necessary to take into account institutions already existing, whic
were more or less complete and more or less satisfactory, but which could be improved
The organisation of rural hygiene in France was not ideal. Legislation was sti
imperfect, and much had yet to be done to bring it into line with the progress ot science ;
nevertheless, for medical assistance and health work, France could count on the help
of doctors of exceptional skill practising in rural districts. These doctors made their
living by private practice, but nevertheless co-operated actively with the public ins -
tutions. French law was very liberal in this respect and only rarely ^ll.owe^ ^OC(iors t0
be officials also. The law on social insurance stipulated freedom in the choice of the doct ,
and there were very few exceptions to that rule : departmental, dispensary and laboratory
doctors, and doctors of the maritime sanitary service. A practising physician in France
was never an official. The only exception was colonial doctors, who practised outside
France itself under special conditions and among very primitive races with whic n
European population could be compared. . ^ r
The French delegation must also make reservations regarding that portion ot
Dr. Stampar’s report dealing with the part played by health centres in the treatmen o