PROBATIONER NURSES.

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume XXXXII, Issue 2800, 13 November 1931, Page 7

PROBATIONER NURSES.

CONDITIONS OF APPOINTMENT. HOSPITAL BOARD’S DISCUSSION. A letter from the Nurses’ and Midwives’ Association relating to the appointment of probationary nurses to training hospitals, was at the October meeting of the Thames Hospital Board, referred to the Hospital Committee for consideration and report. The letter stated that a meeting of the Nurses’ and Midwives’ Registration Board had reviewed the whole matter of the Thames Hospital as a training school. As the result of an inspection of the hospital by the nurse instructor of the Health Department, the following recommendation had

been made:— "That selection of pupil nurses be left entirely in the hands of the matron, who, after appointment, shall be responsible for their training; and also that probationers should be admitted on account of their suitability and likelihood of becoming satisfactorily trained nurses, and not according merely to order of application.” After consideration, the committee, consisting of Messrs Hale, Walton, Kennedy, and Lange, in conjunction with the matron of the hospital, decided that the recommendation was not as favourable as the old method of selection, and that probationers would continue to be considered in older of application. On hearing the report from the committee, several members of* the board commented upon the decision. Mr Danby said he thought it desirable to appoint eligible, and at the came time suitable nurses. The matron, with a long experience of nursing and handling women behind her, should be given control of selection, end in those instances where she thought applicants -unsuitable she would probably save them a probationary trial of three months. He would like to see a change tried. The matron was in a good position to take the responsibility of selection. He was strongly in favour of the recommendation from the Registration Beard

Mr Kennedy disagreed with Mr Danby’.® views that the matron was in a posit ion to select trainees on a personal interview. He could quote cases in which this would not have counted for a great deal. Appearance was r.ot always a guide to character, and the matron would be faced with a difficult task. Mr Danby submitted that less care was taken in selection under thn present system than was exercised in the appointment of an office hoy. Mr Parfitt moved that the report cl' the committee be adopted, stating

V at in his opinion every girl should be given a chanee. Mr Danby’s suggestion would eliminate some of them from even a trial. The probation period gave them an opportunity to make good. Mr Chapman held the view that selection in ordbr of application would not be allowed by the management of other businesses. The board should have more faith in the matron’s power of selection, besides which it was the matron who had to work among the staff. He could submit her choices to t) e board, with reasons for her selection. He considered that there were names on the list that should not be thought of for a moment. Mr Hale said that every applicant should at least be given a personal interview with the matron. If jhe was ret satisfied, then the best girl on the list could be given a trial. Mr Danby said that qualifications did not count under the present system. There was no more important work in the country than that of the nurses in public hospitals. He thought higher qualifications were desirable. He did not wish to create class distinction, as intimated by the chairman, but it was his personal opinion that a girl with additional mental training, gained by prolonged scholastic framing, was in a position to concentrate to the greatest possible extent o.i the study which was a necessary part of a nurse’s training. Mr Lange submitted that if a girl was taken in order of her application then there was no opening left for ciiticirm.

Mr Courtney favoured the decision of the committee. There would be no opening for "wire-pulling.” Mr Lange indicated that the matron had the power of discharge and that a trainee need not continue for twelve months if she were unsuitable. The motion, as moved by Mr Parfitt, was then put to the meeting, Messrs Danby and Chapman voting against. Mr Kennedy then drew the attent on of the Board to the fact that there iright be something underlying the "consideration of the Thames Hospital as a training school.” Ho suggested that the chairman look into the matter and discover from the Department the possibility of the hospital losing its status as a training hospital. The chairman agreed to this proposal, Mr Kennedy pointing out that if the hospital was so derated it became a "second class” institution in the eyes of the people of the district v hich it served.