THE HOSPITALS ACT.

Otago Witness, Issue 3768, 1 June 1926, Page 30

THE HOSPITALS ACT.

ALLEGED BREACHES. PROSECUTION IN AUCKLAND. AUCKLAND, May 27. The prosecution of Mrs E. J. Fullerton Whyte, formerly licensee of WiUesden and Fencourt private hospitals, for alleged breaches of the Hospital and Charitable Institutions Act in relation to maternity patients was continued in the Police CJourt to-day. The charge that defendant had permitted a patient to occupy a room with another patient exhibiting signs of morbidity was withdrawn. For the defence Mr Moody said that in regard to the charge relating to Mrs Gumby there was only her statement in support of the allegation. In respect to Mrs Hamilton it had been shown that the temperature charts produced had been corroborated. It had been the custom to take temperatures, and Mrs Fullerton Whyte had always given instructions accordingly. Mr F. K. Hunt* S.M.: This case is six months old. It is a pity the action was not more prompt. Mr Moody said it was not until October 20 that Mrs Fullerton Whyte ascertained that there was any suggestion of suspicious temperatures. The Magistrate: She took steps to clear the hospital on October 20. It seems hard that she should be prosecuted for an alleged breach on that day. Mr Moody said every doctor in Auckland could certify to the conduct of Willesden. The Magistrate: We will assume that. Counsel said the Health Department had raised no objection to Mrs Fullerton Whyte continuing at Fencourt after Willesden had been closed. She had not attended confinements at Willesden. The Magistrate: There is evidence that she examined a patient. Counsel: That is denied. Mrs Sylvia May Mac Kay said she entered Willesden on October 3 and left on October 20. She was in the same room as Mrs Edwards. Mrs Hamilton was also in the room. For some time Mrs Fullerton Whyte did not attend to patients. She was sure the patient who alleged that Mrs Fullerton Wnyte had examined her was mistaken. In reply to the Magistrate, witness said her temperature had not been taken every day. The defendant in her evidence said her experience extended over 10 years. She employed two other registered nurses and was authorised to conduct both Willesden and Fencourt. Willesden had been in her charge for nine years. The nurse at Willesden had instructions to take temperatures regularly. On October 20 witness received a report that Mrs Strong’s temperature was 101 degrees. When her temperature was still high on the following morning witness advised Dr Hughes.