WAS THERE DISCOURTESY?

Auckland Star, Volume LVII, Issue 303, 22 December 1926, Page 16

WAS THERE DISCOURTESY?

A PARENT'S COMPLAINT. CHILD PATIENT AT HOSPITAL. Complaints that a sister had been rude to him, and that he -had been refused permission to enter a ward to see his injured child were made by a parent in the course of a letter received by the Auckland Hospital Board at its meeting last night. The writer stated that his seven-year-old son had met with an accident, and he took him to the hospital suffering from a broken arm aud internal injuries. The boy' had to be operated on for a ruptured spleen. Instead of allowing him to be wheeled into the ward on his stretcher, the sister in charge instructed a porter to lift him up and carry him to his bed, because the floor had just been polished, and the sister apparently did not wish it to be marked by the wheels of the stretcher; "This may have explained it," commented the complaining parent, who added that when he remonstrated, saying that to take the boy off the stretcher and carry him would cause him agony, the sister was rude and abrupt. "Surely the parents of a child danger? ously injured are entitled to a little consideration and civility," remarked the writer, who said that when, he said he would complain to the board, the sister retorted that she would not be threatened by anybody. He told Dr. Gould, tlie assistant-superintendent, who also received the intimation as a threat. The complainant (Mr. W. E. Hart) expressed gratitude for the treatment accorded his child by the doctors and nurses in whose care he was, but considered he had legitimate cause of complaint against the sister. Dr. Gould told the board that the father was "exceedingly excited," and doubtless exaggerated in this matter. At the time he refused Mr. Hart permission to go into the ward, the patient was perfectly convalescent. On several occa-sions Mr. Hart had been "extremely rude" to the sister. ' Mr. Hart had waited about the main entrance for about half an" hour, speaking to him every time he passed, and became rather abusive. "He said he would quite easily get permission over my head to see his son," said Dr. Gould. "I told him he need not threaten mc, and left it at that." The Chairman: It was not a visiting day? Dr. Gould: No. Mr. Coyle: If a parent says he will report a thing to the board, is it usual at the hospital to regard it as a threat? Dr. Gould: No. Mr. Coyle: I am very pleased to hear it. I think such an attitude would be very undignified. People have a right to appeal' to : the board, if -they think they are aggrieved, and no one has a right' to take such notification as a .threat.. I am very pleased, I say, that the doctor say 3it is not the usual thing. Dr. Gould: He said that if he didn't get in to see the child, he would take it out, ill -or welL That is "where the threat-lay* - I-t would have been against the child's interests to take it out. Mr. Rowe: What about the matter of carrying the child into the ward? Mr. Knight: It seems to mc to be most remarkable. That is the really serious complaint, that a child in such a condition should be lifted off -the stretcher to be carried in. The Chairman: Isn't is usual, doctor, for the stretcher to be wheeled right up to the bedside? Dr. Gould: Yes. I understand it was -proposed to lift the stretcher off the carrier, and that was what he objected to. The Chairman: The father says the porter was told to pick the child up in his arms? Dr. Gould: I do not think that is so. The Chairman: I would like this referred to Sister Manning. From what I know of her, she is a very good-hearted sister, and the last one anything of the kind would be expected from. I have never known of her being abrupt in her manner to patients or their relatives. But there seems to be something wrong in the porter being ordered to lift the child off the stretcher. It was decided to call for a report from Sister Manning.