NURSE HALES' DEATH.

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume LXXVI, Issue 18438, 23 March 1922, Page 6

NURSE HALES' DEATH.

WANGANUI HOSPITAL INQUIRY. THE STAFF EXONERATED. The Hospital Hoard yesterday held an inquiry into the death of Nurse Hales, regarding which there had been allegations of harsh treatinent. The Hoard, as a result of the inquiry, exonerated the staff. Matters in connection with the recent death of Nurse Hales, a member of the nursing staff at the Wanganui Hospital, were further investigated at an inquiry held by the Hospital Board yesterday I'here were present —Mr B. P. Lethbridge (chairman), Mrs Cornyns, Messrs Svenson, Simpson, Pilkington. Brown, Battle, Ritchie. Sharpe, Fletcher. At th? outset Mrs Cornyns said two letters had been signed by the staff. The signatures on one were not the same as the signatures published in the “Chronicle.’’ The secretary (Mr Kerby) said that the original letter was handed to him by Sister Bakewell. He told her to hand it to the medical superintendent. Later he got a carbon copy back with certain! portions of the first lertter cut out.

Mr Svenson said they evidently found that the first petition would not do and so they got another cne. The secretary stated that the letter placed before the Board was not the original one. Mr Battle said it was not revised. Mr Svenson replied that there were lifferent names upon it. The first witness called t was Dr. Robertson, medical superintendent, who said that the late Nurse Hales was 20 years ot age and had been 18 months on the etaff of the institution. She did not come particularly under his observation except during her final illness. Her illness was reported by Nurse Miles. She had had pain for two days, but her temperature was not raised. The ward sister—Sister Pearce—originally reported her. Mr Svenson : When did the matron report that nurse—(a nurse at present an the staff) was inefficient, incompetent and should be discharged. !>r. Robertson said that it was not exactly put that way. The matron had made that statement in a conversation, but bad not asked for her dismissal. Mr Svenson: What date was that?— Somewhere before Christmas. It has no reference to the present matter. Mr Svenson: How many nurses have been discharged since Nurse Hales’ death and up to the first inquiry?—l do not know of any. There have been nurses resigned because of ill health or home reasons. One was taken on two months’ probation and was not made permanent. To the Chairman : The matron was the official person to recommend a girl being sent away. Mr Battle said it was the practice to ask for resignations, and to discharge them. Mr Ritchie: There is no difference in that.

Mr Pletcher: It sounds a little more genteel. Mr Svenson: Cou-’d the matron discharge anyone without your consent, doctor ?—No. Air Battle : When a resignation comes in do you make inquiries as to the reasons?—ln most cases it is backed up by reasons. Mrs Cornyns next asked a number of questions about a letter written by the late Nurse Hales to her parents, which was found at the hospital. Dr. Robertson said that he understood that it was a letter to Nurse Hales’ parents. He had been informed that it wa< destroyed, but that was before tlie inquiry was mooted. Personally he did not see it. Mrs Cornyns said that one of Nurse Hales’ dearest friends had written to her parents saying that death was due to septic poisoning. TLat person had wne to the speaker in the street and she wanted her called as a witness. The Chairman : What right had she to do that? The cause of death was pneumonia. Mrs Cornyns: And septic poisoning. The Chairman : She had no right to write ro Miss Hales’ parents, because that is not true. Mr Ritchie: All we can go by is the certificate of death. The Chairman (to the Board) : Do you want to hear this witness. Mr Ritchie said that it was no us© calling outsiders when they could get "violence from the staff. . The doctor hard a letter from ihe parents of Miss J#lies stating that they had no complaint to make. If they had any complaint tn writing they could inquire into Mr Svenson said it wa§ a public institution and the Board should go thoroughly into the matter whether some of - the evidence was hearsay or not. Mr Battle considered they should hear any evidence available. It was a mistake for the Board to start arguing the point between the witnesses. ‘ After discussing the point further the Board decided to take any evidence availableThe next witness called was a Mrs White, who said that she was a friend of Nurse Hales. The latter came to her place a week before she died and said that she thought she bad appendicitis. She said she did not want to sell the nurses or matron because she would miss her examination. She did not say ’Anything about being afraid to report sick. Air Battle: How does Airs White come to be here to-day? Witness: A Airs Rogers asked me to come. The Chairman: I understand she is a friend of the matron. The next witness. Miss Nelson, said she wrote to Nurse Hales’ family and said that septic condition had something to do with her death. This was after she had seen Dr. Robertson. Proceeding, witness, said that she could speak intimately of Nurse Hales. When the latter came to witness’s place she was unhappy and cried. Mrs Cornyns : Did she ever say that she was afraid to report to the matron? —Yes, she said so to me in the presence of her people. Why was she afraid?—Because she would not get any sympathy. The Chairman: Could you bring any nurses who have made statements outride to snipport that?—l know two; but I have promised not to give their names away. Air Ritchie: You suggested to the parents there was something more than the doctor certified to. Why did you suggest that?—Because I knew her septic condition. You led them to draw inferences. Do you presume you know more than the

doctor? —If you like to put it that way you van. If she was not in such a rundown condition she may not have died. A brother of witness endorsed her statements in reard to Nurse Hales’ unhappy state, and her septic condition. Nurse Murphy said deceased had rad septic fingers at different times. She did not want her father to know that she was, ill.

Witness was questioned about the letter that Nurse Hale s wrote, and which was subsequently burned. She said that she read it. ‘ There was nothing in it that would distress the deceased’s parents. She showed the letter to Sister Levin whom she believed showed it to Nurse Miles. She had no recollection of showing it to other nurses.

I’o the Chairmain: The nurses were encouraged to. report and were not afraid to do so. 1 o Air Svenson : Tliere was no reason to suspect that some nurses got harder duties than others, although the work in two of the wards was heavier. She was not in a position to say that Nurse Hales got heavier duties than others. Sister Lee said she reported the late Nurse Hales for sepsis, and the matron immediately put her on other duty. Mrs Cornyns questioned witness as to whether a nurse with septic fingers should touch patients. Witness said that when she saw Nurse Hales’ finger it was well. That was the time she was put on other duty. It was a pity that Nurse Hales struggled along and did not report sick. Nurses were against reporting sick as they did not like going off duty. She felt that it was a reflection upon her.

Mrs Cornyns said there was no reflection upon witness, and the chairman also gave her that reassurance. To Mr Svenson : Any reports made were fully investigated by the matron. Nurse Newsome said she thought Nurse Hales did not report because she would not get sympathy. Airs Cornyns: Were you at her bedside?—Yes.

Did she say anything?—She said that Nurse Aliles had been horrid to her. Nurses Fold and Trotter were also at the bedside. Witness did not sign the petition as she was then a probationer. She did not know of any coercion to get the signatures. AD Svenson: But if they did not sign it they would be marked?—Probably.

Air Pilkington said that it was most unfortunate that Nurse Ford, an essential witness, was absent. Sister Aliles stated that Sister Pearce, the ward sister, reported Nurse Hales’ illness. She advised deceased not io sit in a draught, but had not suggested that deceased had to get out of bed to turn it round. Nurse Hales complained of a pain in the back. Her temperature on being taken was normal.

'. Sister Pearce said that she did not think Nurse Hales was dangerously ill when she reported sick. She had never hinted that she was afraid to report. It was an unwritten law amongst nurses not to report if they could avoid it. Air Pilkington said 30 nurses out of 44 on tlie staff signed the petition. If the others refused to sign it there was some reason, and the Board should know.

The question was raised at this point as to tlie nurses sending a letter to the “Chronicle” for publication. The chairman considered that they had a perfect right to do so. Air bvenson : they seem to have every right to run the institution.

The Chairman: You are very clever with your remarks.

Air Svenson: They have no right to dictate to the Board. It would not be allowed in private employment. Air Battle said the nurses had asked for the fullest inquiry. As to whether they should have taken it to the press before the Board was another matter, although there was no harm in it. After hearing the evidence the chairman said they had gone right to the bottom of the mattei. It appeared to have been Nurse Hales’ fault not reporting her sickness, as, as far as they could judge from the evidence, she would have been met fairly by the matron and sub-matron. There appeared to have been nothing in Nurse Hales’ letter to cause distress, and the letter was burned in the ordinary course of disinfecting the room. Her fingers do not appear to have been very bad. From the evidence it appeared that the matron and sub-matron had made their cases stronger. All would be glad that the matter wa& now cleared up. There was nothing in the evidence to cast any slur upon the matron or sub-matron. Air Ritchie endorsed the chairman’s remarks.

Air Svenson said the evidence proved that Nurse Hales was not happy in the institution. There was no reason to doubt Alias Nelson’s evidence. Nurse Murphy’s evidence about the letter contradicted Nurse Aliles’ statement. They could not both be right. Nurse Newsome’s evidence was that if a nurse did not sign the petition she probably would bp marked. If the nursing was not made more attractive they would have difficulty in getting probationers. There seemed to be things existing that should not exist. They could not expect nurses to submit to tyranny. He considered that it was time for a change. Air Svenson moved that the matron ajid sub-matron be asked to resign. The motion was defeated by six votes to two, the mover and Airs Cornyns supporting it. The chairman moved: “That after hearing evidence that the Board is of opinion no blame can be attached to any member of the staff, in connection with Nurse Hales’ death.” I’his was carried unanimously.

Air Pilkington saijl some significant admissions had been made, particularly tlie one that if a nurse did not sign the petition she would probably be marked. There was plenty of evidence that there was a tear to report sick. Even if it applied to only one or two it should be removed.

Proceeding, Air Pilkington read sworn evidence of a nurse who left the institution complaining of unsympathetic treatment on reporting sick. He said that ihe matron should be asked to modify her discipline so that nurses could approach her without fear. Air Pilkington moved: “That the Board being convinced of a reluctance to report sick for fear of incurring displeasure, the matron be asked to modify her discipline so that that fear would be removed.” Air Fletcher characterised the motion as absurd, and Mr Ritchie said that no sensible person would bow to it.

In seconding the resolution, Mrs Cornyns said unless they had something she did not know where the institution would end. The nurses knew very well that Nurse Hales was unhappy. There was no doubt that Sister Aliles was a very hard woman. The girls could not speak they were too far away from home. The matron and stub-matron would have to understand that they should treat the staff properly. Air Battle said that from a nursing and medical point of view there was not ia better institution in New Zealand. The motion was to ask the matron to relax her discipline and that might be injurious to the institution. ' The motion was defeated on the cast, ing vote of the chairman. Air Battle did not vote.