Apostasy to orthodoxy: debates before a Commission of Inquiry into chiropractic

This paper examines the arguments presented at the Royal Commission of Inquiry into chiropractic, which took place in New Zealand in 1978. Drawing on the work of Potter, it suggests that the protagonists in the debate, the medical profession and its allies on one side and the chiropractic profession on the other, developed rhetorical strategies to counter competing versions of the world. An unusual feature of this debate was that it took place before 'impartial' judges. The paper demonstrates the delicate process of negotiation performed by chiropractic groups when confronting medicine in an open forum. The paper concludes that in order to resolve the competing rhetorics, the Commissioners sought for a compromise, which at once embedded chiropractic within the public health service in New Zealand and 'de‐radicalised' its claims.