Accepting Pain Over Comfort: Resistance to the Use of Anesthesia in the Mid-19th Century

Rachel Meyer, Sukumar P. Desai

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

News of the successful use of ether anesthesia on October 16, 1846, spread rapidly through the world. Considered one of the greatest medical discoveries, this triumph over man's cardinal symptom, the symptom most likely to persuade patients to seek medical attention, was praised by physicians and patients alike. Incredibly, this option was not accepted by all, and opposition to the use of anesthesia persisted among some sections of society decades after its introduction. We examine the social and medical factors underlying this resistance.At least seven major objections to the newly introduced anesthetic agents were raised by physicians and patients. Complications of anesthesia, including death, were reported in the press, and many avoided anesthesia to minimize the considerable risk associated with surgery. Modesty prevented female patients from seeking unconsciousness during surgery, where many men would be present. Biblical passages stating that women would bear children in pain were used to discourage them from seeking analgesia during labor. Some medical practitioners believed that pain was beneficial to satisfactory progression of labor and recovery from surgery. Others felt that patient advocacy and participation in decision making during surgery would be lost under the influence of anesthesia. Early recreational use of nitrous oxide and ether, commercialization with patenting of Letheon, and the fighting for credit for the discovery of anesthesia suggested unprofessional behavior and smacked of quackery. Lastly, in certain geographical areas, notably Philadelphia, physicians resisted this Boston-based medical advance, citing unprofessional behavior and profit seeking.Although it appears inconceivable that such a major medical advance would face opposition, a historical examination reveals several logical grounds for the initial societal and medical skepticism.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)115-121
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of Anesthesia History
Volume1
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 1 2015
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Anesthesia
Pain
Professional Misconduct
Physicians
Ether
Quackery
Patient Advocacy
Patient Participation
Unconsciousness
R Factors
Nitrous Oxide
Analgesia
Anesthetics
Decision Making
Surgery
Labor
Ethers

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine
  • History and Philosophy of Science

Cite this

Accepting Pain Over Comfort : Resistance to the Use of Anesthesia in the Mid-19th Century. / Meyer, Rachel; Desai, Sukumar P.

In: Journal of Anesthesia History, Vol. 1, No. 4, 01.10.2015, p. 115-121.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{2f3e7ca037b14492907da59e83d0edb8,
title = "Accepting Pain Over Comfort: Resistance to the Use of Anesthesia in the Mid-19th Century",
abstract = "News of the successful use of ether anesthesia on October 16, 1846, spread rapidly through the world. Considered one of the greatest medical discoveries, this triumph over man's cardinal symptom, the symptom most likely to persuade patients to seek medical attention, was praised by physicians and patients alike. Incredibly, this option was not accepted by all, and opposition to the use of anesthesia persisted among some sections of society decades after its introduction. We examine the social and medical factors underlying this resistance.At least seven major objections to the newly introduced anesthetic agents were raised by physicians and patients. Complications of anesthesia, including death, were reported in the press, and many avoided anesthesia to minimize the considerable risk associated with surgery. Modesty prevented female patients from seeking unconsciousness during surgery, where many men would be present. Biblical passages stating that women would bear children in pain were used to discourage them from seeking analgesia during labor. Some medical practitioners believed that pain was beneficial to satisfactory progression of labor and recovery from surgery. Others felt that patient advocacy and participation in decision making during surgery would be lost under the influence of anesthesia. Early recreational use of nitrous oxide and ether, commercialization with patenting of Letheon, and the fighting for credit for the discovery of anesthesia suggested unprofessional behavior and smacked of quackery. Lastly, in certain geographical areas, notably Philadelphia, physicians resisted this Boston-based medical advance, citing unprofessional behavior and profit seeking.Although it appears inconceivable that such a major medical advance would face opposition, a historical examination reveals several logical grounds for the initial societal and medical skepticism.",
author = "Rachel Meyer and Desai, {Sukumar P.}",
year = "2015",
month = "10",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.janh.2015.07.027",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "1",
pages = "115--121",
journal = "Journal of Anesthesia History",
issn = "2352-4529",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Accepting Pain Over Comfort

T2 - Resistance to the Use of Anesthesia in the Mid-19th Century

AU - Meyer, Rachel

AU - Desai, Sukumar P.

PY - 2015/10/1

Y1 - 2015/10/1

N2 - News of the successful use of ether anesthesia on October 16, 1846, spread rapidly through the world. Considered one of the greatest medical discoveries, this triumph over man's cardinal symptom, the symptom most likely to persuade patients to seek medical attention, was praised by physicians and patients alike. Incredibly, this option was not accepted by all, and opposition to the use of anesthesia persisted among some sections of society decades after its introduction. We examine the social and medical factors underlying this resistance.At least seven major objections to the newly introduced anesthetic agents were raised by physicians and patients. Complications of anesthesia, including death, were reported in the press, and many avoided anesthesia to minimize the considerable risk associated with surgery. Modesty prevented female patients from seeking unconsciousness during surgery, where many men would be present. Biblical passages stating that women would bear children in pain were used to discourage them from seeking analgesia during labor. Some medical practitioners believed that pain was beneficial to satisfactory progression of labor and recovery from surgery. Others felt that patient advocacy and participation in decision making during surgery would be lost under the influence of anesthesia. Early recreational use of nitrous oxide and ether, commercialization with patenting of Letheon, and the fighting for credit for the discovery of anesthesia suggested unprofessional behavior and smacked of quackery. Lastly, in certain geographical areas, notably Philadelphia, physicians resisted this Boston-based medical advance, citing unprofessional behavior and profit seeking.Although it appears inconceivable that such a major medical advance would face opposition, a historical examination reveals several logical grounds for the initial societal and medical skepticism.

AB - News of the successful use of ether anesthesia on October 16, 1846, spread rapidly through the world. Considered one of the greatest medical discoveries, this triumph over man's cardinal symptom, the symptom most likely to persuade patients to seek medical attention, was praised by physicians and patients alike. Incredibly, this option was not accepted by all, and opposition to the use of anesthesia persisted among some sections of society decades after its introduction. We examine the social and medical factors underlying this resistance.At least seven major objections to the newly introduced anesthetic agents were raised by physicians and patients. Complications of anesthesia, including death, were reported in the press, and many avoided anesthesia to minimize the considerable risk associated with surgery. Modesty prevented female patients from seeking unconsciousness during surgery, where many men would be present. Biblical passages stating that women would bear children in pain were used to discourage them from seeking analgesia during labor. Some medical practitioners believed that pain was beneficial to satisfactory progression of labor and recovery from surgery. Others felt that patient advocacy and participation in decision making during surgery would be lost under the influence of anesthesia. Early recreational use of nitrous oxide and ether, commercialization with patenting of Letheon, and the fighting for credit for the discovery of anesthesia suggested unprofessional behavior and smacked of quackery. Lastly, in certain geographical areas, notably Philadelphia, physicians resisted this Boston-based medical advance, citing unprofessional behavior and profit seeking.Although it appears inconceivable that such a major medical advance would face opposition, a historical examination reveals several logical grounds for the initial societal and medical skepticism.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84951281759&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84951281759&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.janh.2015.07.027

DO - 10.1016/j.janh.2015.07.027

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84951281759

VL - 1

SP - 115

EP - 121

JO - Journal of Anesthesia History

JF - Journal of Anesthesia History

SN - 2352-4529

IS - 4

ER -