PUBLIC OPINION

Waikato Times, Volume 106, Issue 22690, 18 August 1945, Page 7

PUBLIC OPINION

CURRENT VIEWPOINTS USE OF ATOMIC BOMBS (To the Editor) Sir, —Your correspondent Marcus St. B. James is disturbed by the use of the atomic bomb, apparently on the grounds that it is neither Christian nor humane. I would suggest to Mr James that he is rather allowing his ideals to run away with his judgment. Common sense should enable him to realise that this admittedly terrible weapon will help to shorten the war and in this, I think, lies its justification. Every day this war continued more of our boys were being maimed and killed. The Japanese have a record of cruelty and treachery, and have not so far shown any reason why their lives should be valued above the lives of our own men. Mr James adds that Mr Churchill, the late President Roosevelt and Field-Marshal Montgomery have all told us to get back to the spiritual foundation of Christian civilisation. The words “get back” imply a return. Can your correspondent tell me when, if ever, we have enjoyed a truly Christian civilisation?—l am, etc., SIGNALLER. ELEGIBILITY FOR LAND (To the Editor) Sir,—l wish to bring your attention to an anomaly in the Land Sales Act. In my case I have just been discharged from the Air Force after four years’ service as a volunteer and wish to rehabilitate myself on a dairy farm. I have a farm in view but the vendor will not sell unless I am classed as a serviceman, and the rehabilitation office informed me that unless I have been overseas I am not classed as a serviceman. This I consider an injustice as I am financing myself. Could you inform me if this information affects others of the same category.—l am, etc. FARMER BILL. [Section 2 of the Servicemen’s Settlement and Land Sales Act was amended by section 5 of the Rehabilitation Amendment Act, 1944, clause (c) of which reads: “Who has served as a member of any of His Majesty’s permanent forces or ns a member of His Majesty’s forces mobilised for voluntary service in. New Zealand.”— Editor, Times.] MATERNAL MORTALITY (To the Editor^ Sir,—The Press has recently published an account of an inquest upon a young New Zealand mother who died in childbirth, being treated with chloroform by a midwife. When will young married men and women of this country demand that efficient modern methods of childbirth be made universal .practice throughout New Zealand? That there are such methods, that they reduce mortality and morbidity in childbirth, and are safe to mother and child, is surely, by now, widely known. A few deaths do occur which have no connection with the technique adopted, but in face of the practice and publications of Dr. G. M. Smith, of Rawene (Notes from a Backblock Hospital, and More Notes. . .) and the similar practice of a minority of medical practioners, it is futile for any doctors or laymen to speak of danger to mothers or children from modem painless childbirth technique. Such dangers did, indeed, exist in the early days of what was called “twilight sleep,” but these days are long past. It is not only a matter of the ethical propriety of using, at all times, methods available for prevention of pain, important as that is; it is a , matter of protection of life, of prevention of immediate morbidity, and deferred, long-lasting ill-health among women; and, of some bearing upon birth-rate. Insistent demand on the part of husbands and wives—prospective parents—public demand to the 8.M.A., to individual doctors (refer them to G. M. Smith’s books and re- , cords) and, if necessary, to the Minister of Health and his depart- , ment, must surely bring results. Do those concerned know and care enough to organise and act?—l am, etc., AGNES F. R. McINTOSH