Sexually transmitted diseases/infection checks at recruitment

[MJROB]

Hi All,

A slightly bizarre request, but thumbing through a memoir and I came across a Colonel who complains that a number of his troops are experiencing 'crabs' which he blames on recent drafts bringing into the trench and allowing their spread.

I was just wondering whether anyone had any information/further reading suggestions on what regulations were to be followed (if any) at enlistment to prevent such men from seeing active service.

Regards,
MJROB

[martin_sole]

Well either the Colonel had been misinformed about how soldiers generally get pubic lice, or he used the term "crabs" to apply to body and/or head lice.

[Magnumbellum]

This is actually part of a much wider question about the extent to which their was effective medical examination of troops around enlistment at all. Anecdotal accounts suggest that it was spasmodic and indifferent, which probably accounts for the fact that in WW2 the main conscription act, the National Services (Armed Forces) Act, had written into it that no man could be called up until he had been certified medically fit.

Reverting to the original question, at a later stage in the 20th century there were routine FFI examinations, which officially stood for "Free From Infection", but was generally interpreted as "Fit For Intercourse".

[Chris Henschke]

The 1914 Attestation form for AIF soldiers had the following to be signed by the examining medical officer;

CERTIFICATE OF MEDICAL EXAMINATION.

I HAVE examined the above-named person, and find that he does not present any of the

following conditions, viz. :—

Scrofula ; phthisis ; syphilis ; impaired constitution ; defective intelligence ; defects

of vision, voice, or hearing ; hernia ; hæmorrhoids ; varicose veins, beyond a limited extent ;

marked varicocle with unusually pendent testicle ; inveterate cutaneous disease ; chronic

ulcers ; traces of corporal punishment ; contracted or deformed chest ; abnormal curvature

of spine ; or any other disease or physical defect calculated to unfit him for the duties

of a soldier.

He can see the required distance with either eye ; his heart and lungs are healthy ; he

has the free use of his joints and limbs ; and he declares he is not subject to fits of any

description.

I consider him fit for active service.

[Anneca]

I have the Service Record of a man who served in the 2nd Anglo Boer War and the Great War. In his medical reports he is listed as having been treated for gonorrhoea whilst serving in the East Indies in 1895. He was also hospitalized on board a troop ship in 1897 because of primary syphilis and, whether co-incidentally or not, was deprived a lance stripe. He enlisted again at the outbreak of the Great War and was declared fit for service. I wonder if his previous medical records were available at the time he enlisted in 1914 and, if examined and pronounced fit, did previous medical reports make a difference to whether he would be pronounced fit or not.

Anne

[johnboy]

Do we know what the 'medical' consisted of, other than flat feet , chest measurement and eyesight?

A medical I took for a taxi licence consisted of blood pressure test and my ability to try and touch my toes.

[MaureenE]

The following link is a page from the 1897 Army Medical Department Report. The Army obviously had procedures for medical examination of recruits at that time.

This indicates that 38.25 % of potential recruits were rejected due to medical reasons, including under weight, under height and under chest measurement. 3.47 per thousand were rejected due to syphilis.

https://archive.org/details/reportarmymedic03unkngoog Go to page 34. (Edit: Forum will not allow me to post a link to the particular page)

There is much interesting information in this book.

I am not aware of any reports for later years online, unless you have access to the online "House of Commons Parliamentary Papers" http://parlipapers.chadwyck.co.uk/marketing/index.jsp where you may well find something.

There are some online editions of the Army Medical Department Report for earlier years , see the FIBIS Fibiwiki page Military Periodical online

http://wiki.fibis.org/index.php/Military_periodicals_online#Army_Medical_Department_Report

Cheers

Maureen

[bill24chev]

Congenital syphilis was widespread in Victorian and Edwardian UK. Would this have been noted by examining medical officers or would it be the complications and effects such as hearing impairment that would be a reason for rejection.

Also if a man was accepted despite having congenital syphilis would he, if symptoms of the disease were later spotted by a medical officer, be subjected to the same punishments and hospital regime as cases in the early stages who had reported sick?

[MJROB]

Hi everyone, just a quick message thank you so much for your feedback thus far. I can't get to the National Archives until June so your feedback has been so incredibly helpful.

[hillgorilla]

Congenital syphilis was widespread in Victorian and Edwardian UK. Would this have been noted by examining medical officers or would it be the complications and effects such as hearing impairment that would be a reason for rejection.

Also if a man was accepted despite having congenital syphilis would he, if symptoms of the disease were later spotted by a medical officer, be subjected to the same punishments and hospital regime as cases in the early stages who had reported sick?

If I remember rightly there are three stage of the disease, so surely a medical officer could differentiate. On the subject of syphilis, I wonder what contribution the Great War made to a later rise in dementia arising from the disease, which would probably be in the 1940s to the 1960s?

[Ron Clifton]

I have the Service Record of a man who served in the 2nd Anglo Boer War and the Great War. In his medical reports he is listed as having been treated for gonorrhoea whilst serving in the East Indies in 1895. He was also hospitalized on board a troop ship in 1897 because of primary syphilis and, whether co-incidentally or not, was deprived a lance stripe. He enlisted again at the outbreak of the Great War and was declared fit for service. I wonder if his previous medical records were available at the time he enlisted in 1914 and, if examined and pronounced fit, did previous medical reports make a difference to whether he would be pronounced fit or not.

Anne

Hello Anne

Neither medical nor criminal records, nor indeed any records of previous military service, would have been available to recruiting officers or examining medical officers at this period, even in peacetime. The recruits would be asked certain questions and if his answers were false, he could be charged under the Army Act.

There was also a rule in Kings Regulations that anyone with symptoms of venereal disease had to report sick immediately and seek treatment. If he didn't, that was yet another offence under the Army Act.

Ron

[Anneca]

Hello Anne

Neither medical nor criminal records, nor indeed any records of previous military service, would have been available to recruiting officers or examining medical officers at this period, even in peacetime. The recruits would be asked certain questions and if his answers were false, he could be charged under the Army Act.

There was also a rule in Kings Regulations that anyone with symptoms of venereal disease had to report sick immediately and seek treatment. If he didn't, that was yet another offence under the Army Act.

Ron

Very interesting indeed Ron, especially criminal records not being available to recruiting officers. Looks like it was totally a matter of honesty between the recruiting officer and the recruit.

Thank you, Anne

[Loader]

Wouldn't a medical officer be able to spot evidence of a venereal disease in an examination even if it was cured or in remission? I recall the training films we were shown in boot camp & they were certainly visible effects & very scary!