TRAINING FOR NURSES

Hawera Star, Volume LI, 12 September 1930, Page 6

TRAINING FOR NURSES

EXTENSION OF SCOPE

HOUSE DISCUSSES BILL.

(By Telegraph—Press Association.) AVELLINGTON, Sept. 11. Moving the committal of the Nurses and Midwives Registration Amendment Bill in the House of Representatives to-day, Hon. A. J. Stallworthy said that at present the only recognised training schools for nurses in New Zealand were the public hospitals under the control of hospital boards. If there were a private hospital twice the size of a public institution, doing the same work and run on the same lines, it could not be recognised as a training; school. The Bill was designed to enable such hospitals to be treated on their merits in regard to training ot nurses. There was no ground to fear that, the registration board would not function as satisfactorily as in the past, because ample precautions would be. taken to ensure that there would be compliance with every requirement- of the- board before the board’s approval would be given to any voluntary or , private institution as a training school. The Alinister said that if he had any misgivings on the ground that the change in practice would in any way endanger reciprocal arrangements with the Nursing Council of England and AA’nles lie would drop the Bill. These arrangements were based on the recognised standing-, of nurses in New Zealand and there was no reason to doubt that the board would continue to maintain the same standard of training. The Bill provided that before any private hospital could be approved as a training school there would have to be at least 40 beds open to the public that would be free of charge or at an inadequnt& chnrgo. An y hospital conforming with such conditions would be sure to have at least 100 beds in all, and there would consequently be full scope for the training of nurses. He knew of no other measure that would assist the nurses of New Zealand to such an extent as this Bill. It need not be feared that the registration board would license any hospital that did not provide for ample training in dealing with infectious diseases cases. Mr. J. A. Young said he thought the only objections to the Bill could be met if amendments were accepted while it was being considered in committee. He proposed to move two amendments in committee and he believed they would eliminate any features of the Bill that could be regarded as unsatisfactory. There was a danger as the Bill stood at present that the nursing profession would be flooded and unemployment would follow. For that reason the Nurses’ Association desired that only wards containing public beds in private hospitals should he recognised as training, schools. He also urged that provision should he inserted in the Bill that the board should not recognise any private hospital as a training school unless and until it- had bv reasonable inquiries satisfied itseli that reciprocal arrangements with the Nursing Council of England and AA r ales would not be prejudiced. He considered there should be a definite safeguard on that point: Air. C. H. Clinkard said he felt every provision had been made in the Bill to ensure that- New Zealand’s high standard of training would be maintained. He was also satisfied there were adequate safeguards with respect to reciprocity. . Air. AA'. I>. Lysnar said he did not think there was any serious dissatisfaction among the nurses, or among the public with the present system of training. The Minister should leave well alone. Nothing should he done that might result in lowering the standard of training or in creating unemployment among nurses. He hoped ■ the Bill would not be .passed. It would* of necessity give an advantage to one private hospital as against another and he could not see why the Minister should go on with the measure at the present stage of the country’s development. when there were very few private hospitals sufficiently large to fulfil the. requirements of recognition as training schools. Air. AA’. E. Parry said he felt coni’i need there was no danger of the standard of training being lowered or of the reciprocity arrangements being prejudiced in any way. Amendments to the Bill had been drawn after careful consideration of all the-, evidence given bv experts before the PublicHealth Committee, and he was satisfied the community would not suffer. Mr. AAV D. Stewart said the cardinal weakness of the Bill seemed to be that it gambled with the rights of nurses. Notwithstanding the safeguards the committee considered it had inserted, there was no guarantee that the Nursing Council of England and AA ales would approve of the standard of training set by the board, and there ooukl be~no- suc-ii guarantee until such standard had been submitted to and approved l»v the council in England. He considered the approval of this body should he obtained before there was anv alteration in New Zealand’s conditions with respect to training. The debate was interrupted by the rising of the House at 10.30 p.m.

FILCHING OF PRIVILEGES

MATA MATA HOSPITAL DISPUTE

HAMILTON, Sept. 11

Critic-ism at the action of the Nurses and Midwives’ Representation Board in cancelling the approval of the Matamata Hospital as a training school for maternity nurses was voiced at a meeting of the AVaikato Hospital Board todav. Mr c. -T. AAV Barton considered that the board’s privileges were being gradually filched from it. AAVns the hospital or the nurses’ unions to run the hospital? “All our business,” he said, “is being mapped out by either a Government department or by somebody in AA’ellington, who is not responsible to the ratepayers as we arc.” The chairman > maintained that the training facilities at the AVaikato Hospital were as yood as anywhere in New Zealand.