HANDS OFF ST. HELENS

NZ Truth, Issue 1286, 31 July 1930, Page 4

HANDS OFF ST. HELENS

Women of New Zealand Must Decide The Question

(By Mrs. F. Hay, daughter of the late Right Hon. Richard John Seddon, [ Founder of St. Helens, m an exclusive interview with N.Z. Truth.") lii working for the exclusion of medical students from the St. Helens maternity hospitals m New Zealand, I am but trying to see that the regulations as laid down by the founder are carried out. My father said tliat the silent martyrs of the world were the wives of the working men, and St. Helens hospitals were the gift of the nation to them.

AT the time of their foundation, m his farsighted vision, I' believe he was thinking more of the future than of the present, for undoubtedly there is a greater need to-day for the St. Helens homes where expectant mothers — wives of low wage-earners — can retire m peace and privacy during critical periods of their lives. Much has been made of the fact that only 30/- a week is asked of patients at St. Helens, but these hospitals were not meant to be paying. They were originally intended as a gift to the motherhood of the nation. The training of- medical students m these hospitals is contrary to, and violates all the principles as laid down by the founder. Section 5 of the Midwives Act, 1905, provided for the establishment of maternity hospitals. It was at this time that St. Helens was founded — for the wives o f me n whose eavnings were not great, and also for the training of midwives. I can find no legal authority which provides for the entrance of medical students to these hospitals. I, with others, was unaware until recently that by some emergency arrangement, medical students did enter into St. Helens at Dunedin as far back as 1918, and the movement has been growing ever since. This is quite contrary to the Act, and until the people themselves decide what is to be done I shall continue to oppose the entry of these students. With the advent of the medical student at St. Helens, Dunedin, the training of nurses m midwifery has been pushed into the background. In. 1.026 there were eight nurses trained there. Tn 1929. the number dwindled clown to 4, and this year there were none at all. As a training ground for nurses St. Helens was serving a wonderful purpose. There they received skilled and careful training, which fitted them to go into the homes of the people. The training of these nurses m midwifery is just as important, if not more so, as the training of medical students, for it often occurs that when a woman prefers to stay m her own home, her baby is born under the skilled attention of the midwife before the doctor arrives. The founder stated, that women who entered St. Helens were just as independent as anyone who entered a private maternity home or the patients of any medical gentleman m their own private home. St. He.lens homes are not medical institutions, but were provided as sanctuaries for the wives of men of

moderate means. Those who advocate their use as a training ground for students are looking at the matter purely from a cold scientific point of view. I look at the matter m a more humanitarian aspect. It was m this light that the hospitals were founded. At the time of their inception 'the late Dr. Batchelor wanted to use the hospitals as a training ground for students, but this my father opposed, but now the Batchelor hospital and St. Helens m Dunedin are joined together as" one big training ground for students. The present movement .is going to defeat the very object of the foundation of St. Helens, for the class of women who have used them m past years have possessed just as great a delicacy of feeling and as keen a susceptibility as any among the more wealthy m the countrj'. I can see no reason why St. Helens should be used by the medical students any more than the more expensive private maternity homes, or the paying patients of doctors. But it is a question for the people to decide, as these are public institutions, but until they have decided either one way or thc other, the medical profession have no shadow of right to enter into St. Helens. The form which a. woman patient at St. Helens is required to fill m upon admission states, inter alia, that the patient agrees to be attended by "novice nurses" and "student doctors." I cannot find a copy of the original form, but I am informed that this original paragraph has been amended to include the words "student doctors." There is no question asked m the paragraph. It merely commences: "I agree to " In my opinion it should read: "Do you agree," etc. The authorities state that if any objection has been raised to this point, when the matter has been explained to the expectant mother, the objection has been removed. But what a. time to worry a woman with questions of this sort. She certainly is not m a fit state to be worried with remarks anent the good she will be doing for future womenkind by allowing a medical student or students to be present during the time of her trial. My father founded St. Helens for the women, now, if the necessity exists, let someone else find a suitable place for the training of students, but m the meantime, "hands off St. Helens."