Impotence

In Medical Jurisprudence. Inability on the part of the male organ of copulation to perform its proper function. Impotence applies only to disorders affecting the function of the organ of copulation, while eterility applies only to lack of fertility in the reproductive elements of either sex. Dennis, System of Surgery. Impotence may be considered as incurable, curable, accidental, or temporary. Absolute or incurable impotence is that for • which there is no known relief, principally originating in some malformation or defect of the genital organs. Its existence or nonexistence is not to be determined by mere anatomical appearances, and the mere fact of age alone is never sufficient to imply absence of the procreative power; 2 Wltth. & Beck. 396. It may also be the result of infirmity rather than of age or deformity, as the effect of vicious habits; id.

398.

As a general rule, diseases which do not affect the brain or spinal cord, and which are not attended with great debility, do not on the part of the male prevent intercourse. In acute febrile diseases temporary Impotence.is, beyond question, the rule; but the power is rapidly regained, on convalescence. Mumps may act in a similar manner. Emotion is an exceedingly common cause of temporary impotence. Deformity or defects of development in the organs, as well as disease of such organs, are likewise cause of impotence.

2 Taylor, Med. Leg. Jurlspr. 1.

Ability to procreate is not the test; it is enough if the parties are able to have sexual intercourse; Powell v. Powell, 18 Kan. 371, 26 Am.' Rep. 774; Devanbagh v. Devanbagh, 5 Paige, Ch. (N. Y.) 554, 28 Am. Dec. 443; 3 Phill. Ecc. 325; and impotency arising after the marriage does not avoid it; 30 L. J. Prob. Mat. & Adm. 73. Unless otherwise by statute. Impotence renders a marriage voidable, not void; L. R. 1 Ex. 246; Anonymous, 24 N. J. Eq. 19. It has been held that, in a divorce case, an examination may be ordered of a defendant alleged to be impotent; Atchison, T. & S. F. R. Co. V. Thul, 29 Kan. 466, 474, 44 Am. Rep. 659.

See also 19 Cent L. J. 144, and 2 Bish. M. & D. § 690.

Impotence is a statutory ground of divorce in most states, and in some courts it is held that Jurisdiction of suits for nullity, is impliedly conferred with jurisdiction in divorce; Tiffany, Pers. & Dorn. Rel. 39.

See Le Barron v. Le Barron, 35 Vt. 305; J. G. v. H. G., 33 Md. 401, 3 Am. Rep. 183.

Where this defect existed at the time of the marriage and was incurable, by the ecclesiastical law and the law of several of the American states, the marriage may be declared, void ab initio; Com. Dig. Baron and Femme (0 3); Bacon, Abr. Marriage, etc. (E 3); 1 Bla. Com. 440; 1 Beck, Med. Jur. 67; Code, 5.

17.

10; Devanbagh v. Devanbagh, 5 Paige, Ch. (N. T.) 554, 28 Am. Dec. 443; Bascomb V. Bascomb, 25 N. H. 207; but see Burtis v. Burtis, Hopk. Ch. (N. Y.) 557, 14 Am. Dec. 563. Impotency arising from idiocy intervening after the marriage is no ground for divorce in Vermont; Norton v. Norton, 2 Aik. 188. See Merlin, Rep. impuissance. But it seems the party naturally impotent cannot allege that fact for the purpose of obtaining a divorce; 3 Phill. Eccl. 147.

See 2 Phill. Eccl. 10; 3 id. 325; 1 Chltty, Med. Jur. 377; Bi.sh. Marr. & D.; 1 Bla. Com. 440; 1 Hagg. 725.

See, as to the signs of Impotence, 1 Briand, MM. Leg. c.

2, art. 2, § 2, n.

1; Dietionnaire des Sciences medicates, art Impuissance; and generally, Trebuchet, Jur, dc la MM.

100; 1 State Tr. 315; 8 id.

App. no. I, p.

23; 3 Phill. 147; 1 Hagg. Eccl. 523; Poder6, MM. L6g. $ 237.

See Sterilitt.

See Sterilitt.