MEDICAL VIEWPOINT

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 80, Issue 81, 6 April 1938, Page 8

MEDICAL VIEWPOINT

CRITICISM OFFERED FACTORS OMITTED WELLIN&TON, April 5. •’The proposals for national health insurance put before the public by the Prime Minister (Rt. Hon. M. J. Savage) on Saturday evening last are remarkably at variance with the suggestions oifered by the medical profession, at the request of the Government, both to its appointed investigation committee and members of Cabinet," said the president of the New Zealand branch of the British Medical Association, Dr. P. S. Jamieson, m an interview last night. Dr. Jamieson is also chairman of the national health insurance committee of the association.

“The profession,” he continued, "has consistently advocated that \\ hatever measures were undertaken should be directed toward assisting the people to meet their needs in regard to medical service where these needs press most heavily. But the Prime Minister’s proposal of a free general practitioner service provides the one item of medical service to which the people new have the most ready access. It omits the very things —in particular. laboratory and specialists’ services—which are more difficult to obtain and are essential for the accuracy of diagnosis necessary for the efficiency of the general practitioners’ services. “The principle of offering assistance to those who cannot provide fully for themselves has been adopted in the proposal relating to the superannuation and pensions scheme; and it is difficult to see why the same principle has been departed from in the proposal for national health insurance. It would appear that in this respect the Government’s proposals are based on enthusiasm for a poli-tico-social ideal rather than on the real health requirements of the people of this country.” War Veterans* Allowance “An increase of 5s a week in the war veterans’ allowance would be negligible as far as we are concerned,” said an official of the War Relief Association of Wellington when interviewed. He referred to the disinclination of numbers of men to work through fear of losing th? allowance, and expressed the view that this evil would be intensified with an increase in the weekly payments and in the maximum income allowance. A war veteran, it was explained, was a man who by reason of some physical disability arising from war was unable to enter into work of a permanent nature. The majority suffering from complaints such as arthritis and rheumatism.

“We shall still have to go on assisting these men,” said the official. “Many of them have been looking forward to this legislation, and in fact they have been expecting an allowance of £3 a week. At present it is £1 a week, with 15s for a wife and 5s for each child. The maximum income to be earned is £39 a year, making a total for a man with one child of £2 15s a week. Consequently, numbers of men have been unwilling to earn more than 15s a week, because that would mean losing the allowance. This has been the case particularly with single men. With the allowance made more attractive still, this attitude could be expected to become even more prevalent. “Rising costs in industry have closed most avenues of employment to these partially disabled men,” the official concluded. “There are numerous jobs for which they are fitted, but employers simply cannot afford nowadays to pay full wages for partial work.”