norml11 - Page 30

 for a doctor to employ a method of treatment supported by a respectable minority
 of physicians.
 In Hood v, Phillips, 537 S,W_ Zd-291 {1976) the Texas Court of Civil
 Appeals was dealing, w_th a claim of medica_ ma_practi<:e resulting from a
 .surg_ca_ procedure claimed to have been unnecessary t The court quoted from an
 Arizona court decision ho!!d_ng, that "
 a method of treatment, as espoused and used 0y o . . a
 respectable minority of physicians in the United States,
 cannot be sa_d to be an inappropriate method of treat-
 meat or to be malpractice as a matter of _aw even though
 it has not been accepted as a proper method of treatment
 by the medical profession generally°
 !bid. at 294. Not#ng that the Federal District court _n the Arizona case found
 a _respectable minority" composed of si×ty:f#ve physicians throughout the Un#ted
 States, the Texas court adopted as "the better rule" to apply _n its case, that
 a physician is not guilty of malpractice where the
 method of treatment used is supported by a respect-
 able minority of physicians.
 [bid.
 In Chumbler v. NcClure, .505 Fo2d 489 (6th Ciro 1974) the Federal courts
 were deal_ng with a medical malpractice case under their diversity jurisdiction,
 applying Tennessee law. The Court of Appeals said:
 . . o The most favorable interpretation that may be
 placed on the testimony adduced at trial below is
 that there is a division of _pi_ioa in the medilcal
 profession regardin9 the use of Premarin in the Treat-
 ment of cerebral vascu'_ar insufficiency, and that Dr.
 McC1ure was atone among neurosurgeons in Nashville in
 using such therapy. The test for ma,!pract_ce and for
 community standards is mot to be determined solely by
 a plebiscite. Where two or more schools of thought
 exist among competent members of the. medica_ profes_
 sion concerning proper medical treatment for a given
 ailment, each of which _s ._pported by _sponsio_e