WAIHI HOSPITAL

Evening Post, Volume CXXV, Issue 80, 5 April 1938, Page 7

WAIHI HOSPITAL

LIBEL AND SLANDER

ALLEGED

SUIT BY FORMER MATRON

(By Telegraph—Press Association.)

AUCKLAND, April 4. A claim.lor £475 for alleged libel and slander was brought against Dr. Archibald Jenkins, medical superintendent of the. Waihi Hospital, by Isabella Jane Paddock, formerly matron of the Waihi Hospital, in the Supreme Court before Mr. Justice Fair. Mri'-Fitzherbert represented the plaintiff, and Mr. .Newbery appeared for the defendant.

In the plaintiff's statement of claim •it was alleged that on July 13, 1937, the defendant falsely and maliciously] wrote or spoke to members of the] Waihi Hospital Board and others that the matron seemed 'quite unable to acquire the requisite nursing standard or properly to undertake the management and discipline of the institution. He also said, so it was claimed, that in the theatre the matron did not appear .to appreciate the meaning of the terms "aseptic" and "sterile," and by her actions on three occasions rendered certain of the operations unsterile by mishandling instruments and'operators, thus t delaying operations. Although the superintendent had repeatedly asked her to familiarise herself with theatre instruments, 'she still showed almost' entire ignorance of them and delayed operations when called upon to supply certain instruments. , It was alleged that the defendant had said that the plaintiff had never troubled to familiarise herself with the operation of sterilisers.' .She had made mistakes and failed to carry out, 'instructions in connection: with.the prpr vision of requirements in certain Stray cases which caused delay and inconvenience to both patients and operators and, in a recent maternity case, the medical .superintendent found, on being called to the hospital, that the whole of the trained staff, including the matron, were attending a surf club ball and the husband of the patient had to. be sent for\the matron. On or about July 17, alleged the plaintiff, the defendant wrote, to the chairman of the Waihi Hospital Board that he wished "to draw his attention to two further developments rwhich it urgently necessary, for the safnty of patients, to relieve the matron of her duties without any further delay. . . ."

PRIVILEGE PLEADED. The. defence pleaded privilege and claimed that the statements were not defamatory. The plaintiff claimed that privilege was destroyed by a motive tof malice.

In evidence the plaintiff detailed her experience jn England and New Zealand before she went to Waihi on October 12,; 1935. Dr. Jenkins arrived about November 24; 1935, and she got on with-him quite well. OrtiMay 27, 1936, a senior sister, Edith Black, and a junior sister, May Black, came to the hospital. At this stage the plaintiff's evidence was interrupted^ by consent

Charles, Collier, secretary of Jhe' Waihi Board until; its amalgamation"! vwijh the. Thames Hospital Board, said that 'on March 10, 1936, the board expressed its appreciation of the work of Dr. Jenkins, Matron Paddock, and other members of the staff. From a minute on July 13, 1937, witness read., an entry containing some of the allegations complained of by the plaintiff. The entry was made from a verbal report by Dr. Jenkins that was typed in the office next day and approved by Drt Jenkins. A sub-committee o^ two was set up to report to the board. Later the matron was asked to send in her resignation for consideration and the board did not accept it. In August both Dr. Jenkins and the matron attended a special meeting of the board, when Dr. Jenkins described all his complaints and the matron' replied to them. An application for a departmental inquiry was made but declined. A further 'meeting ,was held on .September 21, witness said, and ' a : resolution v 'dismissing ; the matron /was carried on the chairman's casting vote,; after a resolution .tq- dismiss Dr.. Jerik^ri^ -.had:been lost on: the chairman's casting vote.. Dr. /Jenkins was also instructed to give;the matron the courtesy her position called: for. As a result of an order for' medicine, said witness, the defendant said "to witness that so far as he was concerned the matron did not exist, either as a nurse or in the dispensary. ■ At board meetings Dr. Jenkins was more or less hostile throughout to the matron and he lost his temper.

To. Mr. Newbery, witness said there were private reference? at board meetings to a suggestion that the matron was going to,resign; even;if her resignation, was , refused. Witness .might hay?.expressed the.opinion that' Hhe matron, was.'not of a sufficient standard, to control the, institution. He had come to this opinion when she was' first appointed because she had been 16,ye§rs away from ■active nursing service. Her appointment was not approved by the Health Department for this reason.

Dr. Jenkins was of a very positive type,. said witness. When he criticised the matron he did so completely and when he ■ defended • her he did so properly. He was not vindictive. Complaints about the matron's inability to rim the staff had been made by board members', witness said, and there had been "verbal complaints by members of the staff of the matron's conduct. Such difficulties were more or less continuous throughout the matron's term and tht board's attitude might fairly be summed up that if it got rid of the matron, since it had experienced difficulty in getting her, it would find it difficult to get another matron. ,A departmental-in-quiry was suggested by the defendant. Witness said Dr. Jenkins always Had the welfare of the hospital at heart. The case was adjourned.