The Daily Telegraph. FRIDAY, AUGUST 9, 1895. WHAT ARE HOSPITALS FOR?

Daily Telegraph (Napier), Issue 7439, 9 August 1895, Page 2

The Daily Telegraph. FRIDAY, AUGUST 9, 1895. WHAT ARE HOSPITALS FOR?

At frequently recurring periods the public of Hawke's Bay are asked to put their hands into their pockets to assist the hospital funds. The reason given is that although the Napier hospital, in common with other similar institutions, is supposed to be main tamed by rates subsidised by the Government, so much good is done for the poor and suffering that the public ought to eagerly embrace the chance of making voluntary gifts. That is all right. It assumes what ought to be the fact, i.e., that hospitals exist for the relief of the sick poor. That being so, we ask why it is that three cases of cancer are in the refuge ? Why are they not in the hospital ? Sufferers from this sad and painful disease derive much assistance from medical treatment, if only in the direction of pain alleviated and offensiveness prevented by suitable dressings applied by .skilled hands. This district taxes itself in all kinds of ways to provide a large hospital, with a resident surgeon, a staff of honorary surgeons, and nurses sufficient in number to deal with the requirements of a hospital twice its size, yet three poor fellows who are afflicted with cancer are stowed in the refuge with only a board partition between them' and the cook-house where is prepared the food for the other inmates of the refuge. This disgraceful fact has come to our knowledge through the recent visit of inspection of Mrs Grace Neill, one of the two paid female inspectors in the service of the Government. She has not told us anything—we wish she had, for then our information would have been fuller—but some of her indignant comments upon what she saw have found their way to us, and we take this opportunity oE commending her for making them. We understand that she told Mr Cohen, when complaining to him of the three cancer patients being in the refuge instead of in the hospital, that Napier in this respect was no worse than any other town in the colony. That may be so— we cannot say one way or the other— but if it is so it only shows how widespread is the need for reform. Moreover, it is no credit to Napier that it is entitled to be told that it is no worse than other places. Considering the frequency of appeals for the hospital funds, and the amount of boasting we indulge in over our hospital itself, if we are not better than other districts we ought to be. It cannot be pleaded that these poor fellows are shunted oil to the refuge because there is no room for them in the hospital. The institution is not half occupied, and the contagious diseases ward is entirely empty. We, protest strongly against the idea which seems to underlie a great deal of our hospital regulations, namely, that as far as possible only " pleasant " cases are to be admitted. The chorus of admiration which is always expected when the hospital is mentioned is not deserved while the three unfortunates we allude to are kept in the refuge. They want daily attendance, and although we shall probably be told that Ur Menzies sees them as often as is necessary, we take the position that the refuge is not a hospital, and was never intended to be one. Moreover, these patients are as much entitled to the services of skilled nurses as any of the other unfortunates upon whom disease has come, and they do not get that in the refuge. No doubt the best is done for them there, under the circumstances, with the aid of some of the poor old fellows who are in the refuge waiting their turn for the last summons. But the refuge is not maintained for that sort of thing, neither is it fair to the ordinary inmates to ask them to wait on cancer patients.

'. v "o person who is at once humane and acquainted with cancer as a disease can defend the shunting of those three unfortunates from the hospital to the refuge. We can remember when this was not done. For years cancer cases were treated in the hospital itself, although it was nothing □ ear so large an institution then. If it be said that cancer could not be treated in the general wards, let us have it said by somebody in authority, so that there is no mistake about it, and then the public will no doubt see that the right sort of ward is provided. We are afraid the public themselves are a little to blame in the matter. By manifesting a tendency to endorse that impatience of criticism which the Board has nearly always shown, and which led it to threaten an action for libel when the disgraceful practice of treating diphtheria patients in a general ward was first made known by the Press, the public have encouraged the Board to be far more careless than it would bo otherwise, '.that consideration, however, shall not prevent us doing our duty. The " shuffle his bones over the stones " sort of policy, which results in destitute cancer patients being thrust out of the hospital into the refuge, is in our opinion wrong, and our duty is to condemn wrong.