“A DISGRACEFUL THING”

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 748, 22 August 1929, Page 1

“A DISGRACEFUL THING”

Infectious Diseases Block in City SEVENTY MEDICAL OPINIONS Overwhelming Opposition to Board “I THINK it is a wicked and disgraceful tiling that such a I proposal should be considered.” “It is false to say that the staff is agreed about it.” These were two of the opinions given today when The Sun continued its inquiry as to whether the medical men of Auckland favoured the Hospital Board’s proposal to erect an infectious diseases block on the Domain site below the main hospital buildings. To date, 71 medical men have been interviewed and the weight of opinion is against the scheme in the proportion of nearly six to one.

At Tuesday’s meeting of the Auckland Hospital Board, the chairman, Mr. W. Wallace, supported principally by Mr. E. H. Potter, held to his view that the scheme should be carried out in the face of protests from Dr. E. B. Gunson, the National Council of Women, and Grafton residents. Mr. Wallace based his contention on the assertion that the hospital’s honorary medical staff was unanimously in favour of the proposal, and Mr. Potter declared that Auckland medical opinion was behind him. Dr. Gunson sharply disagreed on these points. The Sun has secured the fullest possible consensus of medical opinion, every available Auckland specialist and practitioner having been interviewed. The result proves definitely that Dr. Gunson was right. The inquiries produced the following result: For the proposal 8 Against the proposal .... 45 Non-committal 17 Somersaulter 1 The following comments are in addition to the 23 opinions published in The Sun yesterday: Dr. J. Howard Lawry: My opinion is not at all undecided. I think it :is a wicked and disgraceful thing that such a proposal should even be considered. The board can find no precedent in the Old Country. There, they put their fever hospitals on vacant areas well out of the City. I do not think the suggestion at all reasonable. In fact, I think it is an absolute danger to the public. Dr. J. W. Maskell: I would prefer to say nothing. Dr. Kenneth MacCormick: Though I don’t think the erection of the infectious diseases block would be of danger to the public, I think it would be better to build it somewhere else, in view of the fact that sooner or later the hospital will have to expand and be separated. Dr. Kenneth-Mackenzie: I don’t think the erection of the block would be any danger to the public, though I think the Hospital Board would be better advised to use the available space for the extension of the general hospital. Dr. Frank Macky I do not wish to make a statement. Dr. W. Cutbbert McGaw: I am not in agreement with the scheme. It is false to say the staff is agreed about it. We were given to understand there was no alternative if we did not accept the scheme. I am strongly against it. Dr. Neil McDougall: 1 am not prepared to make a statement. One doctor who, yesterday, expressed himself as being against the board’s proposal, communicated with The Sun today and said he preferred “to have nothing to say.” Dr. W. W. Baxter: Certainly not. I am strongly opposed to it. An Anonymous Medical Man: I am not altogether in favour of the board’s decision. Dr. Casement Aicken preferred to make no comment. Dr. S. A. Bull: As I am one of the consulting physicians of the hospital, I prefer to make no statement until my opinion is asked by the board. Dr. A. Cumming: I think an infectious diseases block should be within easy reach, but entirely separated from the main hospital in administration and everything else. Another Medical Man: It is only a temporary compromise. The board would have to move further afield

later on. The scheme is only an expedient for five or ten years. An Anonymous Medical Man: I don’t approve of it. It is against all common sense. Dr. H. F. Holmden preferred to make no statement. Dr. S. Kenrick: I see no real reason why they should not be there. Dr. James Kirkwood: It should he as far away as possible. Dr. Margaret Knight: I am not in favour of it. Dr. G. D. Lindsay: I think the site is all right provided proper precautions are taken. Dr. C. E. A. Coldicutt: I am emphatically against it. I don’t think any further blocks should be built there at all. As for an infectious block, the difficulty is with the nursing staff aad with people moving to and fro. There will be too much inter-communication between the block and the main building. The board says it can do it, hut it can’t. Dr. J. R. Connolly: I don’t propose answering the question off-hand. Dr. Dorothy Crawley ■, I am not in favour of it. Dr. Trevor de Clive Lowe, Junr.: I don’t see any danger of infection by the proximity of the infectious block to the main buildings. Dr. L. G. Drury: No. Dr. J. J. Eade: No. Dr. T. Endletsberger: I never lake any side on any of those questions. An Anonymous Opinion: This question should be decided by a general meeting of the B.M.A. (Auckland branch). An Anonymous Medical Man: I do not agree with the proposal to erect the infectious block on that site. Dr. E. J. Miller: lam not in favour of it. Dr. A McGregor Grant: I haven’t considered the matter sufficiently to give an opinion. Dr. Peter Moir: I am against it. Dr. E. B. Gunson, member of the Hospital Board is against it. An Anonymous Medical Man: The Hospital Board has been guided by medical advice in regard to the site for the block, and I would not care to disagree with that advice. However, personally, I think the block would be better placed elsewhere. Dr. Woodward Horsley preferred to give no opinion. Dr. Kenneth Gordon: I have nothing against it. I believe it is an excellent site. Dr. C. H. Wheeler: I am inclined to favour Mr. Wallace’s opinion. Dr. T. Wellington Wilkin: I am against it. Dr. J. H. Will: On the face of it I am not inclined to favour it. Dr. William H Pettit: lam certainly against the proposal. Dr. Douglas Robb: I am against it. Dr. A. C. Purchas: I am absolutely and definitely opposed to it. Dr. A. Martin Ross: Though I don’t think it is dangerous, I don’t believe it to he in the best interests of the public health. I am against it. Dr. W. G. Scott: I am not in favour of the erection of the block in such close promixity to the general hospital. V Dr. J. Somerville: I don't think it is the place for it. Better to keep it separate. Dr. V. Ramsay Smith: Though it has been done before, 1 do not think it advisable. It would be better to have a separate fever hospital. Dr. Leslie J. Thompson: I am certainly against it. There is a certain amount of danger of infection, and it is also undesirable from the point of view of overcrowding. It should be well out of town.