conduct

I thought Morantz-Sanchez's book served as a good supplement to Starr's work. While she focused on a specific case and therefore was able to provide in-depth analysis where Starr's work necessarily required a lot of general information, the two books have a lot in common. For example, I found her discussion of Brooklyn's struggle to define itself outside of the parameters of New York both enlightening and in line with Starr's argument for the societal components of the development of medicine. While the public/private debate of this era was certainly not exclusive to Brooklyn, focusing on a small area helps expose some of the debate's complexities. As Morantz-Sanchez states "as a woman surgeon, Dixon Jones appeared to be doubly out of bounds" (60). Morantz-Sanchez's conveyance of the tension between competeing newspapers, physicians and specialists who both supported and denounced Dixon Jones, the reading public, and her various patients demonstrates the utter complexity of an evolving medical profession within an increasingly confused and suspicious society. Although, at times, a bit tedious, in terms of the medical discussion, Morantz-Sanchez does an excellant job of balancing issues of race, gender, power, and the sociological aspects of medicine.