"The Dichotomists within Chiropractic" by Dr. Wilk, which appeared in the September 1, 1991 issue of Dynamic Chiropractic, is so filled with dangerous misconceptions that it demands an immediate and emphatic response. Dr. Wilk, it appears, will be unable to rest until only the ACA is left to speak for chiropractic. Dr. Wilk states that he knows he enjoys "the overwhelming support of a great majority of chiropractors." The basis for such a claim is unknown to me, and I fear it to be a position of assumed accuracy. He reasons that, with one organization, we will have "unlimited funds, soaring credibility, and everyone will win." Those who believe that all our profession's problems will disappear the day we establish one national organization are deluding themselves.
It is not true everyone wants only one national association, with one agenda, with one leadership structure, with one and only one point of view, speaking for all of chiropractic. I know I do not, and I also know that many thousands of my chiropractic colleagues share this view. My certainty, however, is not based on perception or intuition. Rather, it is based on a count of heads and a count of votes.
Despite all of Dr. Wilk's absolute certainty that everybody in chiropractic agrees with him, it is an irrefutable fact that between 1986 and 1989, when the issue of merger was on the front burner of both the ICA and the ACA, the two national organizations combined lost 4,334 dues paying members. Obviously, Dr. Wilk's vision of bigness had no appeal to that 10 percent of the chiropractic profession who voted emphatically with their membership dollars against Dr. Wilk's unity goal. How the majority of ACA's membership felt on the merger issue will never be known as no general membership vote was ever taken. As for the ICA, the issue was defeated twice by ICA's membership.
What causes genuine alarm on my part is the notion of bigness that Dr. Wilk insists will solve all of our profession's problems. The elimination of competition and the centralization of planning, decision making, and control will guarantee absolutely nothing for chiropractic. Dr. Wilk's insistence that this is the only way for chiropractic to succeed represents the propagation of a dangerous and destructive myth. Bigger is by no means necessarily better. In fact, history has graphically demonstrated that big is usually worse and that big and exclusive are an absolute prescription for failure. The recent breakup of the Soviet Union is an interesting but by no means isolated example of this concept.
We live in a pluralistic society. Our profession is an accurate mirror of the greater society in which we live and work. Our profession has historically been characterized by diversity, differences, and disagreement. Dr. Wilk sees this situation as totally negative and capable of producing nothing but disaster. I hold the view that diversity and open debate are essential elements necessary for growth and development within chiropractic. I also believe that an objective look at the history of our profession clearly shows that, were it not for competition between organizations and points of views, not much of substance would have been accomplished for our profession at all. Large organizations are so closely wedded to the status quo that innovation and dynamic progress are almost always the product of a courageous and insightful few, working in a competitive, pluralistic environment.
I understand Dr. Wlk's attack on the ICA. He blames our organization for the frustration of his personal political goal. In his rush to be right, Dr. Wilk is willing to overlook ICA's long and historic record of achievement and innovation on behalf of chiropractic. Many of ICA's initiatives, from support of Dr. Wilk's own antitrust efforts to overseas development, were ignored or overlooked by other organizations because they challenged the status quo. But to talk as if only one organization can work constructively for chiropractic is not only an insult to ICA, it is a terrible disservice to the members who have spoken with their ballot.
Perhaps the most dangerous myth Dr. Wilk is advancing is his insistence that the politics of the profession are uppermost in everyone's mind. This is clearly not the case, given the membership figures cited above. Indeed, the fixation of people like Dr. Wilk on the politics of the profession is one primary reason national associations have lost credibility with practicing DCs. It is painful for members of our profession to witness association bashing on such a shameful scale. It is confusing and frustrating for the chiropractic community to see hundreds of thousands of dollars spent on a "contain and eliminate campaign" to put the ICA out of business.
We at the ICA do not fear competition, we welcome it. We recognize that no one organization will have the scope or the wisdom to handle every chore, recognize every opportunity, or to respond to every challenge our profession will face in our very uncertain future. The point/counterpoint, reality testing that takes place with two credible national associations is the best guarantee that neither association will lead our profession off a cliff.
Life has no simple answers. We all have our dreams, and I am sure Dr. Wilk is sincere in his. We at the ICA, however, are not asleep, nor are we dreaming. We are awake and working every day to secure a bright future for chiropractic. ICA has been around for 66 years and is going to be around for at least 66 more, and then some.
Gerard W. Clum, D.C.
ICA Board Member
San Lorenzo, California
Dr. Gerry Clum served as president of Life Chiropractic College West for 30 years. He also is a former founding board member and president of the Association of Chiropractic Colleges and World Federation of Chiropractic. Currently, he is a member of the executive committee of the Foundation for Chiropractic Progress.