NAPIER HOSPITAL INQUIRY

Evening Star, Issue 22682, 23 June 1937, Page 12

NAPIER HOSPITAL INQUIRY

TREATMENT OF SIGN NURSES [Per United Press Association.] NAPIER, June 23. The hospital inquiry resumed consideration of the treatment of sick nurses this morning. The Commissioner of Crown Lands at Napier, Mr E. 1.1. Burnley, father of a pupil nurse at the hospital, who contracted a fatal illness at the end of last year while a member of the hospital staff, was the first witness. Mr Burnley said that his daughter died on November 16 last after completing two years’ service. The girl was of an athletic type and 9st 12lb when she joined the staff. She had worked periods of weeks on end without a day off and lost leave was made up later. When she took her periods of leave, however, she usually spent the first day or two in bed in order to recuperate. She took ill after 18 months and her trouble, a severe pain in the back, was diagnosed as muscle trouble, and electrical treatment was prescribed. Tins benefited her considerably, but she began to lose weight and at the time of her second illness in October she weighed only Bst. The girl’s mother had urged her to report sick but she had declined to do so fearing that if she did another nurse would have to do “ double duty,” or another nurse ou leave would have to be recalled. The girl was forced to report sick on the occasion of her illness in October and when her condition improved sufficiently she was taken by her mother, with the approval of the hospital matron (Miss Croft) on a holiday visit to Taupo. The girl again took ill and witness was summoned to Taupo on November 5. The girl suffered severe headaches, which the doctor attending her (Dr Armstrong) could do nothing _to relievo, and also nervous convulsion. Dr Armstrong advised witness to convey the girl to the hospital, expressing the opinion that she was not convalescent but was still suffering from the original infection. When the girl arrived at the hospital her trouble was found to be tubercular meningitis and witness was infored that there was no hope for her. She died on tho morning of November 16.

“ I cannot speak too highly of the care and attention given my daughter by the acting medical superintendent (Dr A. G. Clark), the acting matron, the doctors, and the nursing staff,” Mr Burnley said. He added that he had given evidence only for one purpose—namely, in the interests of tho nursing staff. Ho did not think it right that nurses should work such long periods without leave.

Dr Arthur Grucliy Clark, acting medical superintendent during Dr Foley’s absence, stated in evidence that ho had examined another nurse who had almost begged him to allow her to return to duty, and as a result he had permitted her to do so. Three weeks later witness and Dr Gilray had seen her together, and it had been decided that she should bo given a month’s holiday and placed under a medical overhaul.

Mr Bate: If she had shown any sign of having scarlet fever you would have seen her? Dr Clark: Oh, yes.

Why did you decide to grant her a month’s leave? —She was run down, and I am afraid 1 was rather influenced by the concern of her mother, who was unduly worried about her.