Concealment of that which he has a right to conceal, is as clearly a duty, in many a case, on the part of a physician, as it is on the part of any other person; but falsehood is never a legitimate, or an allowable, means of concealment by physician or layman.  As has been already stated[1] if it be once known that a physician is ever ready to speak words of cheer to a patient falsely, that physician is measurably deprived of the possibility of encouraging a patient by truthful words of cheer when he would gladly do so.  And physicians would probably be surprised to know how generally they are estimated in the community according to their reputation in this matter.  One is known as a man who will speak falsely to his patients as a means of encouragement, while another is known as a man who will be cautious about giving his opinion concerning chances of recovery, but who will never tell an untruth to a patient or to any other person.  But in no case can a physician claim that the ethics of his profession as a profession justify him in a falsehood to any person—­patient or no patient.

[Footnote 1:  See p. 75 f., supra.]

A distinguished professor in one of the prominent medical colleges of this country, in denying the claim of a writer on ethics that it may become the duty of a physician to deceive his patient as a means of curing him, declares that a physician acting on this theory “will not be found in accord with the best and the highest medical teaching of the present day;” and he goes on to say:[1] “In my profession to-day, the truth properly presented, we have found, carries with it a convincing and adjusting element which does not fail to bring the afflicted person to that condition of mind that is most conducive to his physical well-being, and let me add also, I believe, to his spiritual welfare.”  This statement was made in connection with the declaration that in the hospital which was in his charge it is not deemed right or wise to deceive a patient as to any operation to be performed upon him.  And there are other well-known physicians who testify similarly as to the ethics of their profession.

[Footnote 1:  In a personal communication to the author.]

An illustration of the possible good results of concealing an unpleasant fact from a sick person, that has been a favorite citation all along the centuries with writers on ethics who would justify emergency falsehoods, is one which is given in his correspondence by Pliny the younger, eighteen centuries ago.[1]

[Footnote 1:  Epistles of Pliny the Younger, Book III., Epis. 16.  Pliny to Nepos.]

Caecinna Paetus and his son “were both at the same time attacked with what seemed a mortal illness, of which the son died....  His mother [Arria] managed his funeral so privately that Paetus did not know of his death.  Whenever she came into his bedchamber, she pretended that her son was better, and, as often as he inquired after his health, would answer that he had rested well, or had eaten with an appetite.  When she found she could no longer restrain her grief, but her tears were gushing out, she would leave the room, and, having given vent to her passion, return again with dry eyes and a serene countenance, as if she had dismissed every sentiment of sorrow.”