HOSPITAL BOARD RESENTFUL

Otago Daily Times, Issue 19528, 10 July 1925, Page 5

HOSPITAL BOARD RESENTFUL

THE MAYOR’S ACTION CRITICISED. 'AN INNOMINATE DEPUTATION. OF INDEPENDENT CHAIRMAN. CASE OF “ MIND YOUR OWN BUSINESS.” A special meeting of the Otago Hospital Board was held yesterday afternoon to consider a communication from the Mayor in regard to the Robertson case. The meeting was attended by the chairman (Mr W. E. S. Knight), Mesdames Macdonald and Jackson, Messrs Scurr, Morgan, Hancock, Dave, and Quelch, and Dr Newlands. The Chairman said the object of the mecting was to consider a letter received by himself from the Mayor. The letter was in regard to a deputation which had waited on the Mayor in reference to what wasnow known as the Robertson case. In the first place the deputation waited on the Mayor some little time ago, and it had been practically decided to hold a pubbc inquiry, but on further consideration by the Mayor and the citizens who had waited on him it had been decided to await the outcome of the inquiry which had been held by the Hospital Board. It seemed now that a further deputation had waited on the Mayor in regard to the board s finding, apparently the_ members of the deputation were not satisfied with the finding come to by the board, and a letter was then written by the Mayor to himself ■in reference to the meeting which the board proposed to hold between the members of the honorary staff and itself »o define the duties of the medical superintendent, the A.M.0., and the hcaise staff at the Dunedin Hospital. The first letter received from the Mayor was the reason why the board had been called together that afternoon. As he had already stated, the Mayor had written another letter, withdrawing his first letter, and substituting the one which he would now ask the secretary to read. The letter from the Mayor, under date July 1, read as follows; I have to thank you for your letter of the 24th ult., enclosing copy of your board’s finding with reference bo the Robertson case. This afternoon I received a deputation of- citizens who went carefully into the finding of the inquiry, and they are not - altogether satisfied that the action taken by the board in votes of censure has gone sufficiently far. _ They note that your board has now decided to refer the question of the of the medical superintendent, the duties and status of the A.M.0., and the question of the revision of the standing orders of the resident staff to a joint meeting of the Hospital Committees and the committee of the hon. medical staff. A deputation has requested me to writ© you to say that in their opinion thd chairman of this joint committee should be either a man such as Dr Wylie or some other medical representative of the Government Health Department, and that the proceedings should bo open to the press. Any further action to be taken in the calling of a public mooting will depend on this request being acceded to and also the result of the joint committee’s deliberations. I therefore submit to you the decision of the deputation, and personally I trust that it will not be necessary for my hands to be forced' to call a . public meeting. Personally I should like to see the matter finally dealt with by the joint committee that you have now sot up with an independent chairman, _ and the proceedings open to the public press. The Chairman: That Is the letter we have to consider this afternoon. Mr Hancock: Were you Invited to meet that deputation? The Chairman: No. Mr Hancock: Do you know the personnel of it? The Chairman: No. Mr Scurr; Well, I will move that the letter be replied to In these terms: — That hla Worship the Mayor be respectfully advised that the Otago Hospital Board is resolved to deal itself with its own business, for which purpose it has been elected, not only as the representatives of the people of Dunedin, but of the whole Otago Hospital district. The chairman retains the full confidence of the board, and Is quite competent to act as chairman at the conference of the board with its honorary medical staff, and there Is no necessity to call in any other person to act in that capacity. The board has already- arrived at a finding in the Koberston case and taken action therein. The matters referred to the joint meeting of the Hospital Committee and the committee of the honorary medical staff for report are:— 1. The duties of the medical superintendent. 2. The duties and status of the A.M.O. S. The question of revision of the standing orders of the resident staff including all the special departments of the Hospital. These are matters that can only be considered in committee with the hope of reaching finality, and not such as can be discussed in open board, but the result of the deliberations will In due course be reported to the board and the Health Department, Wellington. That his Worship the Mayor be further informed that in view of the foregoing, it will remain with him to take whatever action he deems necessary regarding the request of the deputation of citizens which he received. Mr Dove said It gave him great pleasure to second the motion. The Mayor had stated that he would like to see an independent chairman appointed at their forthcoming conference, but he would like to ask how the Mayor or the chairman of any other public organisation would like a suggestion that outside chairmen should be appointed if public agitations were got up on certain matters coming under their charge. The speaker referred to the agitation which had arisen over the Southern Reservoir construction, and stated that leading articles In the press had heartily condemned the affairs of the city. Also at a very recent date there had been an agitation in regard to the construction of the Union street bridge. If anyone had suggested that an independent chairman should have been appointed to make an investigation into these -works he wondered what the feelings of Mr Tapley would have been. He had questioned the right of their chair man to act as chairman at the forthcoming conference when he stated that he trusted an independent chairman would be appointed. He felt that the Mayor had committed a blunder in interfering with his personal opinion in this matter. He felt that they as a board had ever£ confidence in their chairman to carry out his •duties, and he yvouid oppose any such move as that suggested on the part of any orga. nation, outside the Health Department. Mr Morgan said he had the same opinion in regard to the position of their chairman. He considered that the Citizens' Committee should have waited till their board had come to a final decision. The committee knew that further inquiries were to be made, and he thought in justice to the board that it should have waited until the inquiry was completed. The Health Department hal been asked to be represented when the Robertson Inquiry was being held, but it had replied that it saw no need to be represented, and that the board was quite able to conduct It itself. He would be very sorry to see an outside chairman appointed at an inquiry hold into the administration of the Hospital. , Mr Quelch said that if tno Health Department thought tho board was not capable of doing its work in a proper manner they would have heard of it. Particulars had been furnished, and if there had been anything wrong in the finding the board would have hoard something from tho department. Dr Wylie was not a member of tho department at all, but a private practitioner. Rulbg would bo drafted in due course, and the public and tho Citizens’ League could, if they liked, see them, and see if they could improve upon them. The board welcomed constructive criticism, but must resent interference in this wa". Up did not know who tho deputation consisted of. It was simply a deputation that waited irpon the Mayor. , Dr Newiands said ho could only support what tho previous speakers had said, Tho whole thing seemed to him very extraordinary in some of Its aspects. Ho referred to the deputation os an innominate body, and said it would have been an act of courtesy had their chairman been asked to be prooont when the deputation

had waited on the Mayor. Anothe-r extraordinary feature was, he considered, tho indecent haste of these people to force the hands of tho board when it was actually in course of pursuing its investigations into the administration of the Hospital. In regard to the dissatisfaction expressed with tho finding of the board at the inquiry, they had to remember that their solicitor’s opinion was that the board s rinding had to bo based on the evidence adduced. The case for tho subsequent inquiry was now pending. He failed to see that the board had been dilatory in the matter, and he deprecated tho action of tho deputation in going to the Mayor at. this juncture and trying to coerce tho board by threats of public meetings and other such actions. Mr Scurr asked how the league was- constituted, and by whom formed. Apparently it was a self-oonstituted body which, like the Citizens’ Committee, wanted to run all Dunedin for its own ends. It would not come and say that right at the back of this work there was a personal motive. As far as the inquiry was concerned he would like to draw attention to a leading article that had appeared in the Wellington Post. It had been said that a prophet had no honour in his own country. He would ask permission to read it Mrs Macdonald said they were not dealing with the inquiry. Mr Sourr said that these people said that thov were not satisfied with the board’s finding. He then road the leading article, which was as follows: “A report is published to-day of an inquiry held by the Dunedin Hospital Board into alleged delay in the treatment of a patient. The matter is one of too great importance to the general public to bo dismissed as of purely local interest, when the high responsibilities undertaken by the members of tho medical profession and the implicit trust of tho public in its members are considered. In this particular case a patient with a dental plate lodged in his throat diod in the Dunedin Hospital when about to undergo an operation for its removal. On medical and expert evidence the board reported that, although ‘there was unnecessary delay.’ it ‘noted’ medical opinion that ‘the delay which did occur was not responsible for tho death of the patient, nor did it accelerate the fatal ending of tho case.’ But there seems to have been something more than misunderstandings among members of the hospital resident staff in this case. Its circumstances were such as to demand a special inquiry into them, and, it must bo admitted, a decidedly candid report from the board. For its candour the Dunedin board has earned tho thanks of the whole of tho public of the dominion. The ‘atmosphere,’ as it describes it, at tho Hospital was certainly unsatisfactory, and no doubt as a result of the inquiry and the finding it will bo purified. At any rate, the board is ‘insistent on its repression,’ and it will endeavour to put its own house in order. Public confidence in the medical administration of public hospitals must ho maintained and strengthened. Ethical considerations may be of supreme moment to the profession, but the public is far more interested in the patient than in them. Fortunately thero is abundant evidence that the medical men of, New Zealand, as a body, take tho same view. The need for the Dunpdin inquiry, and the report is regrettable, but tho action of the board will be valuable as an example to other boards to thoroughly investigate all instances of reported tardy attention to urgent oases.” Mr Scurr said he thought that was a splendid answer to the deputation. Mrs Macdonald: What they refer to does not exist in the Hospital. Mr Scurr: The finding of the board was that it did exist. The Chairman: We are not going to argue that point now. The Chairman said it seemed to him that there was quite a misunderstanding on the part of the deputation that had waited on the Mayor _ on the «econd occasion. He was not going to refer to the first occasion —that was passed—he was going to refer to the deputation which waited on tho Mayor quite recently. It seemed that they had a misconception of the purport of tho meeting which was to be held between tho honorary medical staff and the board. They were to meet for the purpose of revising, if thought fit, the existing standing orders relating to the duties of the medical superintendent. the A.M.0., and tho house staff. They were to meet for that and for no other purpose. In reading between the lines of the Mayor’s letter he gained the impression that the deputation, thought the inquiry was to be continued. Ho would like to disabuse their minds of that. They were to meet for one particular purpose only. No witnesses would be called, and there would bo no necessity to crossexamine anyone in regard to the duties. The whole thing would be gone into dispassionately and fairly, and if they found it necessary to revise the rules the rules would be revised, and they hoped that good would bo tho outcome. Whaterver tho outcome, the decision would be passed on to the Health Department, and tho department would then bo asked to approve or otherwise. Nothing would bo confirmed until the department approved. He took a very- grave exception to that part of tho letter which referred more particularly to himself." In the first letter from the Mayor the .part referring to the medical superintendent had been withdrawn. He was now going to refer to the last part of the second letter which referred, ho took it, to him personally. It practically impugned his independence ns chairman of the board, and it also therefore impugned their independence in placing him in the position ho occupied. He took it almost as an absolute downright insult, and for the reason that he had never at any time taken up anything but an independent position. He thought the deputation had gone outside the bounds of reason in asking that an independent chairman should he appointed to conduct the forthcoming conference. It would have been an act of courtesy on the part of the Mayor to have advised the board that he was receiving, a deputation of citizens in regard to the Robertson case and also in regard to the finding of the board. The board should have been given an opportunity to ho present and answer any questions the deputation might have desired to ask. Then he thought it was the duty of the Mayor to advise them of the names of the deputation which went to him.—(“Hear, hear.”) Why keep it such a secret? Mr Scurr: They want to hide their light under a bushel. The Chairman; They had no right to hide their light. , , , Mr Scurr: They like the darkness, for their deeds are evil. The Chairman : Wo know fairly well what their objects are. They are not game enough to stand out in public. I am prepared to say that straight out. Ho moved about the town a bit and ho felt quite confident that they had the bulk of the sensible citizens of Dunedin behind them in regard to the inquiry and its outcome. The result showed quite clearly that the board was not going to bo Mr Hancock,: Sat upon. The Chairman: Well, you can put it that way if you like. They were, however, not going to be interfered with in their duties. They were put there by the people on what was perhaps a wider franchise than that required for the City Council, and they had always tried to do their duty without prejudice and also to act fairly by everyone in the board a employ. . ~ “Are you all in favour of the motion? ’ asked the chairman. “Aye,” came the response. The Chairman: Carried unanimously. Mrs Jackson (who came in late): I was not here. I did not hear it.^ The -Chairman: The motion is carried unanimously. PROTEST BY MEDICAL SUPERINTENDENT. “INCOMPLETE INSUFFICIENT Chairman said a letter had been received from the medical superintendent which they did not intend to deal with then. He'would hand it to the press, and it could come up for consideration at next meeting of the board. Tho letter was as follows: “I feel it my duty to myself respectfully to protest against the finding of the board at the recent inquiry so far as it refers to me: ‘ The board is not satisfied with the measure of control and supervision exercised by tho medical superintendent and the A.M.O. It is not expected that the medical superintendent should personally examine every patient in the Hospital, but it is expected that ho should be sufficiently in touch w-ith what goes on to know if the regulations are not lining complied with or if any patient is not receiving proper attention.'’ I would point out that the inquiry was instituted for the sole purpose of investigating the particular circumstances surrounding tho unfortunate _ death of the late Mr James Robertson, while the above quoted part of the finding is a general one us to which tho inquiry was not directed. I was not. aware that general administration was being investigated or attacked. In fact, after I had been questioned by other members of tho board, Dr Newiands expressed what I understood all along to bo tho position, in tho following

words : ‘ I hav© no questions. He (Dr Falconer) was not in touch'with this case. I reserve my questions regarding such administration to a future inquiry to be hold. I was not permitted to bo present at the inquiry prior to giving my own evidence. This consisted entirely of answering questions as were asked me. No opportunity was afforded me of making a statement or of calling witnesses or of producing the rules and regulations specifying the duties of tho assistant medical officer and of tho house surgeons and other officials. Under such circumstances, so far as I personally am concerned, I respectfully submit that the finding ,was arrived at on incomplete and insufficient material and that the board should do me the justice of withdrawing that part of its report which refers to me until an inquiry on administration is held. I look forward with confidence to such inquiry, when, after having the opportunity of presenting my side of the question fully, I feel sure that the board will then exonerate me completely from any imputation such as is Contained in tho finding above referred to.”