A FATAL "DUMMY",

Evening Post, Volume LXXXVII, Issue 152, 29 June 1914, Page 7

A FATAL "DUMMY",

CHILD SUFFOCATED. ! ___ Ever since the introduction of the "dummy" amongst young children it has been denounced by leading medical authorities, and adenoids and othei troubles peculiar to childhood hove been attributed to the "baby silencer." It is not often, however, that a fatal accident has been caused by the use of the " dummy," but on Saturday afternoon a three-months-old little girl got suffocated in Austin-street through swallowing one of the dummies commonly given to children to keep them quiet. An inquest was held this morning by Mr. W. G. Riddell, S.M., Coroner, into the circumstances attending the death of the child. Tho mother of the child stated that it was born on tho 25th March, 1914, and was adopted by George and Olive Widget in April. She had visited the child several times, and had seen it on Saturday last. The child was well treated, and every care was taken of it. It had gained two pounds in weight. Witness paid a premium of £30 to her lawyer for the adoption of the child, but jshe had paid no money directly to Mr. or Mrs. Widget for adopting the child. Olive Widget, residing in lodgings at 124, Austin-street, with her husband, stated that she adopted the child on the 29th May, but had charge of it for five weeks previously. She iniormed Mrs. Dick, matron of the 'Wellington Receiving Home, who told her she could keep the child without being registered so long as she received no money for it. She received £10 of the £30 premium paid by the mother to the Education Department from Mrs Dick, and bought a perambulator with a portion ot the money. The child was healthy, and got on very well until a day or two before her death, when she appeared to be teething. Witness fed her artificially, and gave her an ordinary "dummy" when she was a little cross. There was no ' ring on the "dummy," but there was a small bit of wire at the end of it, to which a string could be attached. Witness put the " dummy " in the child's mouth while she proceeded to dress herself, and removed a dirty piece of taps from it. The child was dressed and in a perambulator, ready tOogo out. She was lying on her back, and was crying while witness was dressing. On going to the child witness found that the " dummy " had gone a good way into tho roof of the mouth, and appeared to have got jammed with her tongue. Witness tried to get the "dummy" away with her finger, but as it went further back she called to her husband, who picked^the child out of the perambulatoi and tried to get tho "dummy" away, but failed. Mrs. Bailey, who was slaying in the house, then came in, and advised her to go for a doctor. Witness went to a store, leaving the child with Mrs. Bailey and her husband. Witne&s was away about thrqe minutes ; when she returned, Mrs. Bailey had the child face downwards, and was patting it on tho back. Dr. Gibbs arrived in about ten minutes after the child had swallowed the,, " dummy." .Witness ( was married fourteen months. ' She had no children of her own, and she had no previous experience with children, othei than as one of a big family, she being olu* of the elder sibter?. Dr. Harry Edward Gibbs stated that when he orrived he found the child bluish in the face, and attempted to remove the "dummy," but found it very firmly fixed at the windpipe, and had considerably difficulty in removing it. The child was then dead. Witne&s tried artificial respiration, but without avail. The cause of death was due to suffocation, due to the "dummy" lodging in the throat. The "dummy" was one of many types, and was safe to be used had it had a string attached. The smallncss of the "dummy" — about, an inch and a half — made it dangerous without the stiing. The accident could not have been caused by the larger kind of (i'dummy," which is usually about two inches long. The kind of "dummy" used was quite' common. All that could possibly have been done was done by the women, but it would have been better had the child been taken by the feet and hold down, and the hngers not used at all. The child appeared to be well nourished and well cared for. George Helge Widget, seaman, corroborated his wife's evidence. He stated that his wife took the string away from the "dummy" because it was dirty, and intended replacing it with a piece of clean tape. They rented rooms from 'Mrs. Bailey, who came along and took the child from witness whilst he was trying to get the "dummy" away. The Coroner v returned a verdict that deceased had died from suffocation, caused by accidentally swallowing «i "dummy." He added that the adopting parents had done all they could for the child under the distressing circumstances. s