Page:Medical jurisprudence (IA medicaljurisprud03pari).pdf/109

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page needs to be proofread.

however, which are sometimes taken to promote such an effect, not only act by exciting tenesmus, but likewise by inflaming the stomach and bowels, and thus affect the uterus in two ways. It cannot be too generally known, adds the last mentioned author, that when these medicines do produce abortion the mother will seldom survive their effect. It is a mistaken notion that abortion can be more readily excited by drastic purges, immediately after the woman discovers herself pregnant; on the contrary, the action of the uterus is then more independent of that of the other organs, and is therefore not so easily injured by changes in their condition. Upon the same principle that violent cathartics or emetics operate upon the pregnant uterus, any other sudden shock upon the body will occasion a similar effect on that organ; the extraction of a tooth, for example, has been known to produce abortion. A thunder-storm, or violent cannonade, has been supposed to occasion the same result by the concussion of the air; but Mr. Burns considers it more probable that such an effect is owing to mental trepidation. The influence of the passions upon these occasions, such as fear and joy, especially if suddenly produced, is too well known to require a comment, and it has been too often artfully excited for criminal purposes. The same observation will apply to other violent impressions upon the body, such as that occasioned by rapid and uneasy travelling, dancing,[1] walking, &c. Blood-letting also, if carried to any extent, will be liable to occasion

  1. It is a curious circumstance, that, although Hippocrates prohibited physicians from assissting in procuring abortion, he relates the case of a young woman whom he had recommended to dance, and use other violent exercise, for that purpose, in whom it produced the effect, and without materially injuring the woman.