THE HOSPITAL NURSING STAFF.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXIX, Issue 11952, 29 April 1902, Page 3

THE HOSPITAL NURSING STAFF.

'DISCUSSION BY THE HOSPITAL , BOARD. J A MEMBER CENSURED. AT yesterday's meeting or the < Auckland Hospital and Charitable Aid Board (Mr. Jas. Stichbury, chairman, presiding), the action of Mr. A. P. Friend, a member of the Board, in forwarding circulars to the members of the nursing staff of the hospital asking them to give an expression of opinion as to the hours of general leave to the staff of an evening, again came up for discussion. When this matter cropped up at the Board meeting some six weeks ago the chairman moved, "That a voto of censure be passed by the Board on Mr. A. P. Friend for distributing ballot papers among the nurses," but the matter was adjourned to allow of Mr. Friend—who had meanwhile left the meeting— present to defend his action.

Mr. John Bollard, M.H.R.. who moved the adjournment, continued the discussion, stating that he believed Mr. Friend had committed an error of judgment, but thought a vote of censure on a member would be going rather far in the matter. Mr. Friend had meant well, but had taken the wrong course, and it would be sufficient that there should be an expression of disapproval. It was not desirable that private members should act in a manner calculated to interfere with the internal working of the institution.

Tho secretaryat the request of Mr. A. Bruce—then read the correspondence that had passed on the natter, including the letter from the senior medical officer (Dr. Collins), who condemned Mr. Friend's ac-

tion as likely to stir up strife among the nurses.

Mr. .John Walters thought the line of action adopted by Mr. Friend most unwarrantable.

Mr. Friend, in defence of what he had done, produced a copy of a letter, which ho proceeded to read. This stated that the chairman (Mr. Stichbury) bad on Wednesday, February 19, visited tho nurses' diningroom at tho hospital and put it to them whether they would continue under tho "pass" system with regard to leave, or, as an alternative, adopt a rule similar to that in vogue in Christchurch, which provided that nurses should not bo out at night after ten p.m. without the permission of the matron and house surgeon. The writer went on to say that the chairman, in doing this, had taken the nurses

by surprise, and had given them to understand that they must have one rule or tho other. Under the circumstances they chose tho evil they knew of " rather than fly to others they knew not of." •Several members here called upon Mr. Friend to give the name of the writer, but this ho refused to do. saying that he did not feel justified in doing so, as it might lead to unpleasantness and jeopardise the position of a member of the nursing staff. He then submitted an amendment censuring the chairman for the action he had

taken in the matter, but this not being accepted, ho went on to defend his action, stating that what he had dono had been done as a private individual and could in no way bo identified with his position as a member of the Board. As long as he thought that any injustice had been done he would make it his duty to ondeavour to sift the matter to tho bottom with a view

to having it rectified. If he felt that there was a suspicion of coercion, as suggested by the letter, ho would bo prepared to move in the faro of all the resolutions of censure

the Board could pass on him. He was equally justified in approaching the nurses as he had done as the chairman had been in the line of action he had adopted. Messrs. A. Bruce and A. B. Harris were to an extent in sympathy with Mr. Friend with regard to tho nursing staff, but were inclined to think that he had gone the wrong way about rectifying the matter.

Mr. Garland thought Mr. Friend's sole object and desire was to get a free advertisement, and expressed the opinion that ho would be prepared to accept a vote of censure every day in tho week as long as he got the advertisement. He considered Mr. Friend's action had, to say the least, been indiscreet.

The Chairman said no member of tho Board would regret more than himself the

necessity for passing a vote of censure on one of their number, but he held that under

the circumstances no other course was open to him. He denied that there had been any coercion used on his part when he had approached the nurses, as they had unanimously coincided with his views and were perfectly satisfied with what he had done. The question for the members of tho Board

to consider was as to whether they were going to oiphold the dignity of the chair and see the affairs of the Board administered in a right and' proper manner or allow a private member to interfere with the discipline of the institution they had been placed there to manage. The motion censuring Mr. Friend was then nut to the meeting and adopted on the voices. Mr. Harris dissenting. Mr. Friend having thanked the Board for the vote of censure tho ordinary business was proceeded with.