A DOCTOR'S REPUTATION.

Auckland Star, Volume XLII, Issue 192, 14 August 1911, Page 6

A DOCTOR'S REPUTATION.

ALLEGED TTNSKIELED TREATMENT. CLAIM FOR £598 DAMAGES. The first case heard at the Civil Sessions of th e Auckland Supreme Court, which were opened this morning, was one in which Alice Beatrice Shortland and Frederick William Shortland, of Taumarunui, represented by Mr Moss, sought to recover from Dr. Stanley Arthur Hull a sum of i-508 10/, including special and general damages, for alleged negligent and unskilful treatment. Messrs. iVtoVeagh and Singer appeared for de- | fendant. Mr. Moss mentioned that plaintiff was a solicitor at Taumarunui, and defendant a medical practitioner at Auckland, and they were old friends. In November, ISK)9, Mrs. Shortland was operated upon at the Erinliolnie hospital by Dr. Bull for a fistula, but it was discovered that there was a growth on. the os coccy bone near the end of the spine. This growth, it was admitted, was skilfully removed, but the wound, though healing on the surface, constantly broke out afresh, despite further treatment by Dr. Bull, also by Dr. Howard at Taumarunui, and a three months' holiday in Central Otago. The wound caused intense agony and restricted free movement, and no cure resulting. Mrs. Shortland was sent, fifteen months after the operation, to the Hamilton Hospital, and on the old wound being opened up, a piece of gau.-.e or medical dressing was found somewhere between the spine and the bowels. Through etiquette, no doubt, said counsel, the doctors declined to givo exact information as (o the bit of dressing found and its location, and while such an air of mystery was probably justifiable in the interests of patients, it made it difficult to bring an action [ of the kind before the Court. Counsel pointed out that immediately after the gauze or medical dressing was removed, the wound healed, and Mrs. Shortland recovered, and the ]>oint for the jury to decide was whether Dr. Bull, by negligence or oversight, was responsible for (he material left in the wound. Vindictive damages were not being claimed, but merely an amount as compensation for expenses entailed, for loss of Mrs, Shortland's services, and for the pain and torture she had endured in the fifteen months' illness. Frederick William Shortland, in his evidence, corroborated counsel's statement, and declared that his wife had suffered intensely and continuously during the fifteen months between the operation by Dr. Bull and the admission to the Hamilton Hospital." Owing to the difficulty of getting assistance at Taumarunui. the witness said he hai to do most of the household work and nursing of his wife, and neglect his own business. For a time he had a trained nurse in, and also got his sister to come out from the Old Cora try. lie had also to employ a housekeeper to look after the children, and to engage a man to do his office work. Witness said his suspicion of the trouble was aroused by what he saw on the chart at the Hamilton hospital. Cross-examined, the -witness admitted that the origin of his wife's complnint was of seven years' standing, and lh:it she had complained of a pain in the back, near the region of the oppration. tor years past. He attributed it to the after effects of an attack of rheumatic fever. After the operation the wound was packed by Dr. Howard, and no doubt also by the trained nurse, who was in attendance for three weeks. (Proceeding.)