FRIENDLY SOCIETIES AND THE DOCTORS

Evening Post, Volume XCI, Issue 96, 24 April 1916, Page 3

FRIENDLY SOCIETIES AND THE DOCTORS

Sir, —In the report of the deputation of medical men 'that waited on the Hons. Mr. Russell and Mr. Hanan last week, the Hon. Mr.. Russell asked the following question: "Has any test been made to show, assuming there is a lodge with 100 members in it, how many patients would call for medical service in the year." The replies of Drs. Lyne, Giesen, and Gibbs were to 'the effect that it worked out at anything from Is down to 3d per visit. Now, sir, lam secretary of a lodge about that size (for the period under review an average of 120 members receiving medical .attention), and at the beginning of this dispute with the medical men I decided to ascertain the value of the service rendered by the doctors connected with the lodge to the members. I therefore sent a. circular to each member, asking him the number of visits that had been paid to the doctor 'at his surgery, by the member himself [or dependents entitled to medical benefits; also the number of visits paid by the doctor to the member or his dependents at the member's house, for a period of eighteen months prior to 30th June.. 1915. 1 received 90 per cent, of replies from the members, then I gave the 10 per cent, that did not reply the same average of visits as the 90 percent, that did reply, and the total number of visits to and from, put against the total amount of money paid for that purpose during the same period, and it worked out at 6s per visit. Anybody interested, medical man or lodge member, is welcome to examine those figures. Now, sir, 1 am quite prepared to believe because I know it is a fact, that even with this lodge, and in the period under review, that some of the doctors connected with this lodge did not receive more than that terrible Is per visit we hear so much about. But whose fault was that? .Under the period or a greater part of the period under review, we had 120 members receiving medical benefits, and three doctors divided it; 110 of those members were on one doctor's list, and the other two doctors divided the other 'ten members between them, and may have had more work for the ten than the one doctor had for the 110. That is not the fault of the. amount paid ; it is the fault of 'too many medical men wishing to divide the (I was going to call it "spoil" because nearly every new doctor that, has come to Wellington to start a new practice during the last few years, has applied for lodge practice to put him on his feet, and that put the word "spoil" in my mind), but T will call it fees. Now, sir, the fact of raising the fees will not make any improvement, because | while there are so many wishing to divide the fees, there will always be the same unequal distribution, and consequently dissatisfaction from the ' few whose lists and cheques are small at the end of the quarter. The only solution, and -the societies have offered it to the medical men, is for the medical men to allot the societies, six of their number to be what are now termed lodge doctors, on whom the lodge members would have first right of; call, and I am quite sure that with the fees the lodges pay, plus the extra fees, the doctors would and always have charged the members, that those six doctors at anyratte would be quite satisfied. And the societies would not in any way be interfering with the largo private practices that we know some of them have, especially since the war started, as so many other doctors have left for the front. If the local medical men cannot see their way, or are too busy to allot us six of their number to do our work for the fees which we consider sufficient, then we must ask the Government of the day to protect us, and those doctors who are willing to como to Wellington and are satisfied that our, terms- are sufficient and reasonable. In "the published report of last week's deputation of doctors, the Hon. Dr. Collins in his statement No. 7 says: "R-egarding another doctor who did come and a.ccept service with the lodges, the fact is that he left of his own accord after one week's experience of the situation." Now that is entirely contrary to fact. The written resignation of Dr.' Smyth tells us just the opposite, and 1 have no doubt more will be heard of that question later on. Again, the statement by the Hon. Dr. Collins that the doctors have been carrying the lodges on their backs is rather Gilbertian, for the effect seems to have been that instead of the weight on their backs having' oppressed them, it has rather inflated them, to the condition of after a few years of the weight-carrying inflating process the doctors have bwm able to resign from the societies' practice, in very comfortable circumstances and no longer require the pressure. Nor do I think the bankruptcy records of the Dominion show of any doctor who has ever become bankrupt. through iodge practice ; they 1 may have for tht want of it. T read a ; short 'time ago in a copy of the Medical Journal, that the friendly societies were prepared to accept any derelict of the medical profession to attend their members' That is not so, as far as Wellington at anyrate is concerned, because the Wellington societies have always had the best of the profession available in their time and day. The Hon. Dr Collins was a lodge doctor in Wellington in his day, also Dr Chappie, and the late Dr. Grace, and some of the' very, best of them, right down to the present day It was generally considered an honour, and there_ are a number of close personal friendships between the mem- ! bers and their old doctors, as there ! should be.—l am, etc., | H. SHAPCOTT, l Secretary Court Loyal, Northland, No. 8787, AiO.F. 17th April,. 1916.