SCHOOL DENTAL SERVICE.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CXVIII, Issue 18573, 27 November 1920, Page 10

SCHOOL DENTAL SERVICE.

TO THIS EDITOXt. Sir, —I ask space to enter my protest against the manner in which the Government are endeavouring to thrust their ideas of dental service the unsuspecting children of the State schools. In a matter such as this, and of which the layman knows nothing, advice should be sought from experts (in this case the dental profession). An overwhelming majority of the dentists have strongly declared against the Government schemo of partially trained operators. We, as a profession, care little whether these operators are male or female, but we do insist, and our insistence is the result of years of experience, that these operators must bo fully trained. To allow a half-trained operator to operate oil .the human body is immoral, and the dental profession views almost with alarm the apathy of the public on this matter. Do the public realise that they are about to consent to tho dental mutilation of their children, for this is what the State scheme means. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing, and 200 partially trained and incompetent operators are a mighty dangerous force and capable of inflicting an enormous amount of damage. These Hie strong words, but we can defend our position for we know full well of what wo write. Let the public not be under any misapprehension regarding the attitude of the profession towards dental service to the school children. The idea is the “ baby ” of the profession and We have for years asked tho Government to apply the need, but we little dreamed that such a vicious scheme would be propounded. We want the children of our State schools to receive dental service, but wo insist that the Service shall be a real one and not a dangerous makeshift. Would any of those officials who are responsible for the proposed Government scheme allow a half-trained operator to remove tonsils or adenoids from their children ? I think not 1 What does the public think? Mr Editor, the dental profession is fighting an honest battle, and if we win, it will be to our detriment, not to our advantage, and we ask your help and the help of all the editors throughout the Dominion in exposing to the public the very grave dangers of the Government scheme. We stand for a State dental service staffed by properly qualified and competent operators, and. our appeal to you and to the people is to try and arouse the public to a sense of its responsibilities. This Government scheme has been described as cheap and nasty—so it is, but tho laity must remember that when words such as these are applied to operations and their results, the words have a more significant meaning. It would be more correct to describe the scheme as dear and dangerous. Everybody knows that cheap labour is dear at any price, and when it comes to employing cheap operators then the results become dear and dangerous. The result obtained is the determining; factor whether labour is cheap or dear. Let us see how the Government scheme will work out. These partially trained women are supposed to be capable of doing simple fillings and extractions. Let us suppose that they are capable to this extent, and let us further try and picture their work and its results. In a few years all the simplo fillings will be done, a few dressings will be applied, and the rest of the teeth needing attention will be extracted! Do you realise what this last word really represents? Mr Editor and tho public, it means that considerably over a million teeth that could be saved will be extracted lay the time tho school dental nurses have completed their first round. Some few teeth will have to be lostanyhow, but quite a million teeth of those that will be extracted could be saved by employing competent operators. The loss of these teeth is a-very serious matter for the public m e t-..-parents of those unfortunate. a?! children, but more serim ' ss: extraction of tooth is the re - I ting ‘ deformity with its trav •' ml '-m-.se-quences. Dr Pick or il’, T ' : ... . to rsiso his -' !<•<• •• -m .-i tins f o- • meat'-'-'in; -/»•■ »(loti C > - ha 1 -, attempted -o o il! rP - ' task. D-the-hon gen 11 email, lu' on and reinwo that Professor Pickeriii is a man who both in medical and dental circles is of international fume, and who in matters of the prevention of dental caries and oral sepsis is ono of tho world’s leading: authorities —who also in this matter can speak with authority and a clear conscience because, being out of private practice, lie has- no axe to grind? Therefore, Sir, wlieu Dr Pickeriii attacks this scheme as unsound it is of more consequenco. to listen to him thar. to try to believe tho Hon C. J. Parr really knows what ho is talking about when he says in effect that it is sound. It behoves all parents and taxpayers to peruse carefully the correspondence now going on in the columns of the daily papers. The taxpayers have to pay and tho parents have to decide whether they will stand by in silence while their “children . are improperly cared for or whether > they will raise (heir voices in protest and demand ■proper dental treatment for their children. In conclusion, I would urge the public to bear in mind that wo dentists know from experience that none but properly qualified operators can render the service needed by those children, and in the matters of health this statement is doubly truo.—l am, etc., CHAS. E. ST JOHN. Christchurch, Nov. 26, 1920.