HOSPITAL INQUIRY

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LXXI, 23 June 1937, Page 6

HOSPITAL INQUIRY

TREATMENT OF SICK NURSES CONSIDERATION RESUMED A FATHER’S EVIDENCE [By Telegraph—Press Association] NAPIER, This Day. The hospital inquiry resumed consideration of the treatment of sick nurses this morning. The Commissioner of Crown Lands at Napier, M F. R. Burnley, father of a pupil nurse at the hospital who had contracted a fatal illness at the end of last year while a member of the hospita staff, was the first witness. Mr Burnley said that his daughter died on 16th November last after completing two years’ service. The girl was an athletic type and her weight was 9st 121bs when she joined the staff. She had worked periods of weeks on end without a day off, and the 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 tok ill after 18 months and her trouble, a severe pain in the back, was diagnosed as muscle trouble and electrical massage was prescribed. This benefited her considerably, but she began to lose weight and at the time of her second illness *n 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 on 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 agai took ill, and witness was summoned to Taupo on sth November. The girl suffered severe headaches which the doctor attending her, Dr Armstrong, could do nothing to relieve, and also nervous convulsion. Dr Armstrong advised witness to convey the girl to 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 informed that there was no hope for her. She died on the morning of 16th November. “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 the nursing staff. He did not think it right that nurses should work such long periods without leave. DR. CLARK’S EVIDENCE Dr. Arthur Gruchy Clark, actingMedical Superintendent during Dr. Foley’s absence, stated in evidence that he 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 be 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 I was rather influenced by the concern of her mother who was unduly worried about her.” Mr Elliott: “There is some question that if the nurse was fit to take on nursing in Napier was she perfectly normal on 30th August?” “Presumably so.” “How many times did you see her?” “Medically twice. I saw her once to see if she was fit for duty.” “The bacteriological examination of the throat would show scarlet fever?” “Not very often.” “I put it to you that there is no way of testing the throat to show that th: patient has scarlet fever?” “No.”

“She worked among infectious diseases?” “Yes.” “She comes back ill with a sort throat and in the incubation period after scarlet fever. Have you any hesitation in saying with these facts that she had scarlet fever?” “I do not think so. Had she had scarlet fever it would have been noticeable, but if she was not seen it would not have been.” “Would it be strange for a lay person with a logical mind to say that the girl was run down and contracted the sore throat being ill in bed for some time ” “No, certainly not.” “It seems that tne girl was in bed for 18 days?” “Yes.” “After being up for three days she went back to her duties. Was that not taking a risk with her health?” “Yes. It would have been advisable to have given her a week’s holiday.” “Would she have been a menace to the nurses’ home if she had scarlet fever?” “Yes.” When he examined the nurse, said Dr. T. Gilary, he saw that she was suffering from trouble with her tonsils and was nervy, but she said she was all right. She did not want to be put oir duty. It was quite possible that she had scarlet fever and he considered il was time she was relieved of her duties. Mr Grant: “When yo i examined her did you see any signs of peeling?” “I did not see any.” “Would you say that had the girl had scarlet fever?” “There was a possibility.” “So that she might have been infectious and a carrier?” “Yes.”