Nurses' and Midwives' Registration Bill

Kai Tiaki : the journal of the nurses of New Zealand, Volume VIII, Issue 3, 1 July 1925, Page 116

Nurses' and Midwives' Registration Bill

As we go to print, the above Bill, which is partly to consolidate the two Acts which have been in force for 25 and 20 years respectively, and partly to bring the legislation up to date with modern movement, is before the House. It has been read once and its provisions have been announced in the press. With regard to the registration of nurses no very great change has been made in the original Act. The term of training is the same. The age of registration reverts again to 23. The chief change is that instead of the registration being in the hands of the Director-General (actually in those of his assistant, the Director, Division of Nursing) it is now to be made under a board consisting of fi\ # e persons, the Director-General as chairman ; the Director, Division of Nursing, as registrar; a medical practitioner nominated by the Minister of Health, a registered nurse and a registei i ed midwife by the Nurses' Association. Much detail is left to regulations and it will be for the Board to approve of the hospitals as training schools.

The part of the Bill involving the more important changes is that concerning midwives and maternity nurses. Instead of one grade only being registered there will now be two grades and the training period will be lengthened. The woman qualified to act as a midwife without medical supervision except in cases of abnormality and the Avoman qualified to take cases only with a medical practitioner in charge. The general trained nurse also will be required to take a longer course than at present. It will be for the Board to lay down the precise length of training in regulations. The woman who qualifies only as a maternity nurse may, on completion of a further course, become a.midwife.

The Bill as read will probably go through many ' alterations, one clause especially would if passed as it now stands, be most dangerous and would be most unfair to the women who have already qualified as midwives, but who act only as maternity nurses. There is not a great field in New Zealand for midwives, there are so many doctors that it is only in isolated places that nurses take the responsibility of conducting confinements alone. Still for district work among the poor and away from medical aid it is necesary that a sufficient number should be able to take that responsibility.

The clause referred to and which was specially mentioned in the press was the one prescribing the terms on which untrained women acting as maternity nurses would be allowed to register for one year after the Act comes into force. This it is hoped to safeguard so that hardship will not be caused to deserving women, but at the same time faith will be kept with the women who have gone through their training in the past.

Before our next issue we hope that a just and workable Bill will have passed and in the meantime the Nurses 7 Associations should endeavour to see the Bill when copies are available and to consider whether or not its provisions are acceptable. We are sure it is the desire of the Department, which, after much consideration, is bringing this Bill forward, to act for the interests of the nursing profession. The linking up of the two separate Acts for nurses and midwives is in itself a good move and the representation of both mit'st's ami midwives on the Board is a proper recognition of the Nurses' Association which is to nominate these members.