HEALTH CENTRE SCHEME FOR HUTT VALLEY

Wanganui Chronicle, 3 October 1946, Page 5

HEALTH CENTRE SCHEME FOR HUTT VALLEY

MAIN POINTS OUTLINED BY COMMITTEE (P-A.) Wellington, Oct 2. A health centre scheme for new State housing areas in the Hutt Valley, which allows no private practice by doctors, has been detailed by the Hutt Valley Health Centre Committee. The Government is reported to favour the plan, the broad outlines of which already have been opposed by the British Medical Association. The organisation, control and finance of health centres proposed for Epuni, Naenae and Taita, is dealt with in a report by the committee. It states that previous opposition to the scheme by the B.M.A. was that until the grouping of preventive and educational agencies might be desirable, no interference to a doctor’s private curative practice should be permitted.

The committee's plan is for the State to provide health centre buildings and equipment, and undertake routine maintenance. Each centre would combine in preventative curative servies, including, on the preventative side, some, or all, of the following: Ante-natal and post-natal treatment, and speech, and child guidance, foot massage and physiotherapy immunisation, and tuberculosis clinics, annual health examinations and dispensary. The affairs of each centre would be administered by a local committee, comprising three doctors, two nurses, or other personnel, all members of the centre, and three laymen appointed by local residents. The report states that the health centre would undertake to provide a 24-hour service to this end, and doctors and other personnel would be free to arrange a roster scheme, whereby doctors and other personnel would take turns at duty at night time, weekends and holidays. The doctors salaries would be paid, in three sections:—

(1) A basis salary, with increases for special qualifications and length of service.

(2) A capitation fee, depending on the number of patients on the doctor's list. (3) Fees for special clinics or other work, such as contributions to medical journals and special reports, with the exception of complete elimination of direct financial considerations. The relationship between doctor and patient would be fundamentally the same as under ordinary private practice. It is claimed that each doctor could refuse to admit any particular patient to his list and the same privacy and confidence would be maintained, with no interference from other parties. Every patient could withdraw from the scheme without prejudicing his social security rights.