Stories provide great opportunities to gain insight, wisdom and potential solutions. This famous story reminded me of chiropractic. Perhaps there is something to gain from it.
Are you familiar with the story from the Old Testament of King Solomon and the baby?
It is the tale of two women both claiming to be the mother of the baby in question. They came to King Solomon for his advice on how to settle the matter. His solution? Cut it in half.
Now imagine if you were King Solomon and the baby was not a baby but instead the profession of chiropractic. How would you judge the matter when presented with the “chiropractic baby?”
Now here’s the tricky part.
You do not have two mothers, but four standing before you! Each claiming an equal right to the baby and some claiming the only right.
The first mother tells you that chiropractic is the detection and correction of vertebral subluxation to allow for the fullest expression of life. She relates that it is separate and distinct from the practice of allopathy and provides legal evidence of such.
The second mother tells you that chiropractic is the treatment of neuromusculoskeletal and some organic conditions through the detection and correction of subluxation and other natural interventions. She shows you her diploma from a college that has been in existence almost as long as the profession itself. She then takes out the state scope of practice act that guarantees her right to perform all she is doing in her office.
The third woman states that chiropractic is a primary healthcare profession, a part of medicine, and that in addition to manipulations of the skeletal system, chiropractors are trained to diagnosis and treat most human aliments and do so with natural substances.
A fourth woman and younger cousin of the third claims that chiropractic is what her cousin just mentioned but insists that it also includes the use of pharmaceutical agents and minor surgery.
So King Solomon, how do you respond?
Do you call for the sword to cut the baby not in half, but in fourths? Do you give out four swords and let them continue to battle it out? Or do you consider the principles of freedom and liberty of man to pursue his own desires as long as it does not harm his neighbor?
If you opt for the last solution, the necessary implications of the the fourth paradigm must be evaluated in regards to liberty. Is this paradigm so far removed from the first two that it harms the value and very existence of the others, and thus is not the right of this woman to stake claim to the baby?
If you opt to hand out four swords, what guarantee do you have that you will not have the same three or four women standing before you, or perhaps their children or children’s children, bloodied and battered from a battle of beliefs and political/legal entrenchments that have left all depleted of both property and position in the market?
The reality is, we have no King Solomon or Solomons capable of making such a decision.
The system is not designed in this manner, nor is it right for any one person or reigning aristocracy to make such a difficult decision.
Thomas Paine in his Rights of Man stated, “It is only from the nation themselves that reforms can be expected.”
Only the nation will provide the reform necessary to save the baby.
Join our email list