THE PUBLIC THE MIDWIVES, AND ST. HELENS" HOSPITAL.

Auckland Star, Volume XXXIX, Issue 66, 17 March 1908, Page 6

THE PUBLIC THE MIDWIVES, AND ST. HELENS" HOSPITAL.

(To the Editor.) Sir, —At a recent inquest. Dr. Purdy _.__id "more opportunities" should be pro■vdded for the instruction of those who practise midwifery. 1 agree with him. This necessity has often been emphasised lief ore. Why are they not provided? sVhen the St. Helens' Hospital was opened this subject was in view. Probationers Irom the registered obstetric homes, and anidwives in practice, were permitted to •attend the lectures at the Hospital, and "to sit for t he final state examination field -there. After the first year these privileges wen- switched off. The lectures -and the privilege of being rxamined for a -diploma «i re limited to those residing in the St. Helens' Hospital. Why? If it le claimed that the practical training -out of this institution is not sufficiently gnod to warrant the St. Helens' hali-mark __being given to any but internes. I should like to point out that the cases in the -private homes are attended by the doctors whom the patients engage; those in the St. Helens' Hospital—except a Sew abnormal eases—an- attended by the '. matron. Why should the practice of the doctors be less sufficient or instructive than that of the matron? The registered , i liome.s have every year a clientele of I ' irom forty to sixty each. ; The average midwife has a large mca- | : sure of experience. She is ignorant of •' sound technique —untaught. This want h the lecturers were designed to apply, file j ' i_s not now permitted to attend them. J _The lectures are limited to the few learn«ers —two to fivt—who live in the Hos- ] spital. Why': How are the public needs j ■to be supplied': Where do the wives of the workers come in. who wish to remain j 'in safety in their own homes? They _annot afford a Hospital nurse at two ' guineas.—l am. etc, "ARBACES." <