NAPIER HOSPITAL INQUIRY

Waipawa Mail, Volume LXV, Issue 6, 23 July 1937, Page 1

NAPIER HOSPITAL INQUIRY

COMMISSION'S REPORT DR. ALLAN BERRY SEVERELY CENSURED. DIVIDED CONTROL ON THE BOARD. “The evidence discloses that the working of the Hawlce 's Bay Hospital Board has not been harmonious and the Board has been divided into two rival sections, broadly representing Napier and Hastings and surrounding district, ’ ’ says the report of the Royal Commission which recently inquired into the affairs at the Napier Hospital. A summary of the report, which was released on Wednesday, comments on a breakdown in supervision and technique in connection with an outbreak of viilvo-vag'initis (venereal disease) in the children’s ward, the actions of members of the staff, and the excessive hours worked by the nurses.

Regarding the conduct of one of the members of the staff, the report states : —‘ ‘ His personal association with some members of the nursing staff has been of such a very serious nature that we have no option but to recommend that the evidence in reference to this be placed before the Medical Council of New Zealand for consideration of what disciplinary action within its province it might consider necessary. ’ ’ In conclusion, the commission states that there is much to be said for the contention that the hospital system in New Zealand should be, in a large measure, nationalised. “The Board,” states the Commission, “has also been sharply divided on the question of Dr. Allan Berry’s dismissal from the honorary staff. The situation is further complicated by the fact that Dr. Berry is both a member of the Board and of the honorary staff; he thus acts in the dual capacity of employer and employee. “The Board has held special inquiries, reports of which have appeared in the newspapers; this has not tended to promote harmony.

“Dr. J. Allan Berry’s resistance to a majority of the Board in reference to his proposed dismissal as a member of the honorary staff was entirely subversive to discipline, and this, to gether with other factors, helped to divide the nurses into two camps. The evidence given before us also proves that Dr. Berry’s conduct, both as a member of the honorary staff and as a member of the Board, was such as to merit the severest condemnation.

PERSONAL ASSOCIATION. “Dr. J. Allan Berry is the only member of the honorary staff whose conduct calls for adverse comment, Dr. J. Allan Berry’s personal association with some members of the nursing staff has been of such a very serious nature that we have no option but to recommend that the evidence in reference to this he placed before the Medical Council of New Zealand for consideration of what disciplinary action within its province it might consider necessary. “In reference to the heat treatment given to his own and other patients suffering from vulvo-vaginitis in the Shrimpton Ward, we have the following observations to -make:—His want of candor, to put it mildly, in his relationships with his professional brethren on the honorary staff, with the medical superintendent, the matron, the child’s parents, the Coroner, and with the Board, was detrimental to the discipline and co-opera-tion of the nursing staff.

“Apart from the Board, there are in the Napier Hospital three administrative heads, namely, the medical superintendent, the matron, and the managing-secretary, each with a certain degree of independence. The disorganisation in this hospital as a result of such triple control is opposed to the maintenance of satisfactory discipline and co-operation. < ‘ The system of control is full of possibilities for the creation of difficulties. There should he only one head, clearly defined, namely, the medical superintendent, and he should be the head of the instiWtion not only in theory, but in fact. The matron should be responsible to the Board through the medical superintendent. Similarly, the managing-secretary, who should be designated by the word ‘secretary’ and not ‘managingsecretary,’ should he responsible to the Board, except as to his secretarial duties, through the medical superintendent. ’ ’