HOSPITAL NURSES.

Press, Volume LVI, Issue 16848, 31 May 1920, Page 7

HOSPITAL NURSES.

*0 THE EDITOR OT "TAX TRESS.'' Sir.—Dr. Fox's unwillingness' to accept Xurso Jlaude's explanation of her remarks at the Council of Churches ancnt nurses, is to be regretted lor obvious reasons. Nurse Maude ex- i plained in her letter her scheme of thought, and I r.m bound to say that j my recollection of her specch accorded j with that scheme. She sketched the > terms of service which experience had j taught. her to impose on district j nurses. Those terms include one Iree day each week and also part of each j Sunday. iShe knew that in hospitals generally much harder are imposed, and she very vigorously said so. Dr. Fox showed, perhaps unconsciously, that harder tonus are jmposed in Christ-church hospital. The workers-' irreducible minimum—a free dny m j each week—is not yet- ac-.-orrie.l to } these much tried servants of tV.e public. I Nurse Maude levelled a general charge j against hospitals th.it- they '"knock nut" not ''knock about" their r.urses. and she included Christchureh hospital (though not by special mention) in the charge. The public will agree that herein Nurso Man do rendered yet another service to the community which she serves so well. Her very moderate statement contained in her letter of explanation ought to have been much more, chivalrously accepted by the authorities than it was. —Yours, etc., J J. NORTH, Secretary, Council of Churches. May 30th.