4. What is the treatment—(a) prophylactic, applied to the parents, and (b) curative? We may now take these up seriatim.
No more important questions can be submitted to a medical man than those pertaining to the marriage of syphilitics. Involving as it does the welfare of many individuals, modifying or fixing the conditions or circumstances of one or more lives, his opinion should be exceptionally definite and well grounded. The responsibility of advising or consenting to the marriage of a person who has once had syphilis is undoubtedly great; the responsibility of prohibiting it is, however, no less so. Matrimony is the natural condition for the majority of people. Enforced celibacy, especially in males, brings with it not infrequently a long train of attendant evils, moral and physical. It will not do to assume that professional duty is properly discharged by telling all patients to be on the safe side and to remain single for fear of inoculating wife or offspring, unless it can be clearly shown that there is a definite and unavoidable risk in every case, which continues throughout life.3
3 "The surgeon who, on account of past syphilis, forbids marriage to an otherwise eligible man must remember that he forbids it at the same time to some woman, who, possibly, if well informed as to her risks, would willingly encounter them.... Respecting a malady so common as syphilis, while it is often our duty to warn, it is also not unfrequently our duty to encourage" (Mr. Hutchinson, preface to the English translation of Fournier's Syphilis and Marriage, p. vii.)
There are two distinct methods of arriving at an answer to the question under discussion: first, by considering the probabilities in regard to the essential nature of syphilis; and, second, by carefully weighing the clinical evidence in the matter. It seems evident that belief in any particular theory of syphilis assigning it to this or that class of disease must have an important influence in determining the opinion which is held as to its curability, or at least as to its indefinite transmissibility.
If the late symptoms, the so-called tertiary outbreaks of the disease, are held to be evidences of the presence in the system of the specific virus, which has simply remained for a long period, perhaps for many years, latent or quiescent, and which is thus again manifesting its power; if syphilis is believed, accordingly, to be a practically unlimited disease, conforming to no known law as regards its duration, corresponding to no other infectious or contagious malady in having a period of termination—more or less delayed perhaps, or more or less indefinite, but still invariably present—at which time either the particular poison or the susceptibility of the system to its influence has become exhausted;—if tertiary syphilis, in other words, is regarded as simply a continuance or recurrence of the disease, differing in no essential respect, except as to the particular tissues involved, from the same disease in its early stages, it is difficult to see how marriage can ever be conscientiously recommended to a person who has once contracted it.
It is unfortunately true that in no given instance is it safe to assure a patient of further complete immunity from the disease. In any case, however mild in its course or under whatever treatment, there is always an element of doubt as to the development of subsequent symptoms. The probability of their appearance may be reduced to a minimum, the character of the case and the thoroughness of the treatment may both seem to give assurance that a cure has been completed, and yet both patient and physician may be mortified and annoyed by an outbreak of tertiary lesions. This, I think, would be admitted by every one of large experience with the disease, and indeed furnishes the chief argument to those who deny or are sceptical as to its curability. If, then, it were impossible to predict with any sort of certainty that the contagious and highly transmissible stage of syphilis would terminate during the life of the individual, it would manifestly be unwise to permit marriage, with its risk of inoculating the innocent partner and the consequent double risk to the offspring.
If, however, syphilis is, as taught by Mr. Hutchinson,4 one of the exanthemata, having, like them, a period of outbreak, a period of efflorescence or eruption, and a period of subsidence, and followed, like them, by certain non-contagious sequelæ, which we call the tertiary symptoms, but which are merely relapses or degenerations of parts affected during the secondary stage, it becomes evident that the risk of transmission to wife or husband or children after the lapse of a certain interval becomes greatly reduced or almost nil. No one thinks of forbidding marriage on account of a previous attack of small-pox or scarlet fever or typhoid fever, even although there are unpleasant consequences which sometimes follow these diseases.
4 The London Lancet, Feb. 5, 1876; Reynolds's System of Medicine, Am. ed., p. 423.
Or if another and still more plausible theory of syphilis is adopted, and we look on the tertiary period as one of contraction or obliteration of lymphatics due to long-continued irritation by the new cell-growths of the secondary stage, which from the very onset affect those vessels, our views will be materially modified. During the primary period, then, when the new cells, which either constitute the poison of syphilis or are its carriers, are accumulating at the site of original inoculation, constituting the induration of the chancre, or are slowly finding their way into the general system through the lymphatic vessels, proliferating in their walls and thickening and hardening them, or during the secondary period, when they are rapidly multiplying in all the tissues of the body, the risk of inoculation or transmission would be manifestly great. When, however, by destructive metamorphosis and degeneration, either with or without the aid of drugs, they have been eliminated from the body, the contagious element disappears with them; and although here and there throughout the body some important lymphatic trunk may have undergone irreparable injury, and may have been contracted or obliterated, permitting of the accumulation of waste products until the node or gumma or tubercle which we call a tertiary symptom makes its appearance, yet the disease has lost much of its terror, and has become dangerous only to the patient himself.5
5 Clinical Lectures on the Physiological Pathology and Treatment of Syphilis, by F. N. Otis, M.D.; Syphilis, by V. Cornil, Am. ed., 1882, pp. 17-27.