Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

QUESTION OF FEES

URGENT CASES IN WAIHI HOSPITAL PATIENTS FROM OUTSIDE SCALE FIXED AT 9S PER DAY Treatment of urgent cases from the Thames, and Tauranga Hospital Boards’ districts at the Waihi hospital at the rate of 9s instead of 12s a day was the subject of a notice of motion tabled by Mr S. H. Brown and discussed at the monthly meeting of the Waihi Hospital Board on Tuesday evening. Speaking in support of his suggestion, Mr Brown said that there

was little that he could say as the matter was one of which they had often talked. Complaining letters regarding charges had been received from Thames from time to time, and as Waihi accepted lodge patients at 4s 6d a day he thought that 3-j a day from urgent outside cases should be enough. This amount would be guaranteed by the other boards for people for whom they were legally responsible, and from whom they often did not recover a penny.

Mr J. W. Meiklejohn asked if the outside boards paid their accounts straight away or kept the Waihi board waiting.

The secretary (Mr J. W. Tetley) replied that on certain occasions they had been kept waiting, but that this may have been due to the charge of 12s a day. Thames had kept the board waiting a long time once, but had been better* lately. Tauranga had always been rather prompt. PROMPT PAYMENT? “How do we pay?” asked Mr ,F. Raddings.

Mr Tetley: We pay promptly. Mr Brown, in referring further to his motion, suggested that in the event of its being carried they should ask that Thames should look on cases admitted to the local hospital from a broader point of view than before, and pay as promptly as possible. “A bit of an insult, don’t you think?” queried a member. Mr A. B. Robinson: It was also an insult when they said that cases classed by out medical superintendent as urgent were not urgent. Mr J. Kemp; Too right it was. Mrs S. P. Williams then seconded Mr Brown’s motion. Mr Robinson observed that the patients’ would have to pay through the other boards the 9s a day, and moved as an amendment that any patients from either the Thames or Tauranga districts treated as urgent cases be cared for at 9s a day, so long as their accounts were settled within three months of their discharge; the superintendent still to have the right to refuse admission in cases which he did not consider urgent. The chairman (Rev. J. D. McParlane): That is the same motion, in effect, as that of Mr Brown. The cases must be urgent. AGREEMENT WITH THAMES? “Couldn’t we-enter into an agreement with Thames regarding charges?” asked Mr Meiklejohn. Mr Robinson: They will not agree to anything. “Then neither should we,” retorted Mr Meiklejohn.

Mr Brown: They only charge 12s a day because we do. We treat twenty of their cases to every one of ours which they treat. Mr Kemp wondered why the Waihi board should reduce its charges before Thames did.

Mr Brown: It is only common sense that they would also. Mr Robinson (cynically): We won’t get any common sense from them.

Mr Raddings: If we didn’t we could rescind the motion again. Mr Brown’s motion was carried by six votes to two, Mr B, Pascoe asking that his vote be recorded against it as he considered it a breach of the, rules of the board.

A further suggestion by Mr Brown that the Thames, board be. asked in future to view urgent cases in a more broad manner was agreed to,

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/WHDT19290919.2.10

Bibliographic details

Waihi Daily Telegraph, Volume XXVI, Issue 7904, 19 September 1929, Page 2

Word Count
604

QUESTION OF FEES Waihi Daily Telegraph, Volume XXVI, Issue 7904, 19 September 1929, Page 2

QUESTION OF FEES Waihi Daily Telegraph, Volume XXVI, Issue 7904, 19 September 1929, Page 2