Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

Proposed Maternity Benefits

Minister Outlines Scheme FREEDOM OF CHOICE OF DOCTOR Per Press Association. WELLINGTON, Last Night. In a statement to-day on maternity benefits under the Government’s social security scheme, the Minister- of Health (Hon. P. Fraser) said he believed there was general agreement that the provision of efficient services in relation to maternity was one of the most important objectives that could be aimed at in any national health scheme.

In view of that fact the Government, in its implementing of the health services of the Social Security Act, had concentrated first ot all on the maternity benefits section, and it confidently assumed that the service provided for in the regulations and contracts issued at the beginning of the present week, aiming at the provision of a doctor, nurse and maternity hospital for all mothers, wa3 a very big and most important step forward in the interests of the mothers of the Dominion, and one, as far as he knew, was in advance of anything elsewhere. It was to be hoped, therefore, and was anticipated, that hospital boards, medical practitioners, nurses, private hospital licensees and the general public would co-operate wholeheartedly in making the maternity benefit section a great success, so that the full value of its provisions could be shared in future by all mothers. Efforts had been made to preserve and improve tho facilities which had been available in the past and provide adequate remuneration and good working conditions. Benefits Not RetrospectiveThe Minister then goes on to summarise the benefits which the Government proposes under the scheme, and the procedure to be adopted by medical men, nurses and others in regard to its inception. r' .■**.. The Minister makes it plain ihat the benefits cannot be made retrospective, and any woman receiving any of the several services in relation to maternity will be entitled to benefit, therefore, not earlier than the date the contract commences to operate with the hospital, doctor or nur»e rendering the services and, of course, not earlier than the date appointed in her particular health district for the commencement of the particular class of benefits. Mr Fraser then proceeds to indicate the salient points included in the benefits under the scheme. With regard to cenefits in public maternity hospitals the fund will pay to hospital boards £2 5/- in respect of a day or days of labour, and 12/6 a day for fourteen days succeeding the date of birth. No charge fcdll be made against patients for the period of treatment. Somewhat similar provisions are made in cases of licensed maternity hospitals. Medical Practitioner Benefits. With regard to benefits afforded by ;he medical practitioner, the Minister points out all registered medical practitioners in New Zealand are •ligible to enter into a contract with tho Minister, and every effort has been made ;o provide the best type of service and De fair to both doctor and patient Patients will have complete freedom cf :hoice as to which maternity benefits practitioner shall attend them, and tho :o-operation of the medical profession will make the services of a doctor available to a big majority of New Zealand women during pregnancy and :onflnement. With regard to benefits afforded by obstetric nurses, provision has been nade for payment of such nurses atending those women who wish to be onfined in their own homes. The Minister states that arrangements ire being made for the early Issue of eaflets on the subject of maternity benefits for expectant mothers, and it Je jstimated that the provision of these Deneflts will cost the Social Security ’und unwarrts Of £SOO 000 n*>r annum HAWKE’S BAY DOCTORS’ RESOLUTION SHOULD REFRAIN FROM ACCEPTING CONTRACTS (Special to “Times.”) NAPIER, April 28. Meeting at tne Napier Public Hospital last night, the Hawke’s Bay division Df the British Medical Association resolved:— “That this meeting is of opinion that medical practitioners should refrain from accepting contracts to supply maternity benefits until the terms ol other Social Security benefits undei part 3 of the Act, especially general practitioners and hospital benefits, have been published and found acceptable. Apart from other objections, the presenl regulations are not in the best interest! of the patients, tending as they do tc discourage the practitioner from obtaining a second medical man to assist or to give an anaesthetic.” The meeting was well attended MATERNITY CONTRACTS REJECTED OTAGO MEDICAL MEN Per Press Association. DUNEDIN, Last Night. Falling into line with motions adopted elsewhere, the Otago division of the British Medical Association has unanimously decided to decline to sign the official medical contracts. That decision was reached at a meeting on April 26. The meeting was in favour of a cash benefit being paid direct to the patient, leaving her free to make her own. arrangements with her doctor. It was emphasised that in tho meantime practitioners would continue to provide treatment as they had previously done. Mr. H. Walden Fitzgerald was appointed president of the Otago division,

replacing Dr. N. C. Speight, who lias retired. Mr. Stanley L. Wilson was appointed secretary. GROUNDS OF OBJECTION RECOMPENSE INSUFFICIENT CHRISTCHURCH, April 28. Christchurch doctors are almost unanimously opposed to the acceptance ot tho maternity contract. A member of the Canterbury Division of the British Medical Association said this morning that objection was taken to the terms of'the contract on numerous grounds apart from feeling. He said that a £5 fee for full attendance was inadequate for the services rendered. A doctor who considered it necessary to call in the services of one or more practitioners was in an unjust position, as the maximum amount payable in respect of one patient was £5. A doctor who called in one or more practitioners in an emergency had to meet those practitioners * fees himself. Furthermore, the whole contract was packed with such an enormous amount of red tape as between doctor and the Health Department and the Medical Officer of Health that the wheels would become clogged. The filling in of forms and other red tape requirements would take up far too much of the doctor’s time.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/MT19390429.2.56

Bibliographic details

Manawatu Times, Volume 64, Issue 99, 29 April 1939, Page 5

Word Count
1,006

Proposed Maternity Benefits Manawatu Times, Volume 64, Issue 99, 29 April 1939, Page 5

Proposed Maternity Benefits Manawatu Times, Volume 64, Issue 99, 29 April 1939, Page 5

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert