CALLS AT NIGHT

Auckland Star, Volume LXXIII, Issue 122, 26 May 1942, Page 6

CALLS AT NIGHT

DOCTOR'S SERVICES

CO-OPERATION EFFECTIVE

Experience had shown that the number of night calls for a doctor, made through the St. John Ambulance AssociatTon, was only, on an average, five or six per night, whereas it Tiad been estimated when the scheme was inaugurated that there would be an average of ten or twelve, said Mr. A. Eisdell Moore, president of the Auckland division of the British Medical Association, to-day, commenting on a letter from the Minister of Health, which was before the Hospital Board last night. There were three reasons why the calls had been fewer than anticipated, said Mr. Moore. One was that many people preferred to wait till morning to secure the services of their own selected doctor, rather than accept the services of some unknown practitioner. Secondly, a number of doctors were willing to answer calls made by well-known patients, and this fact relieved the night service. Thirdly, no maternity calls were undertaken by the service.

Reason for Fee There had been no exaggeration on the part of the B.M.A. concerning the pressure of night calls, said Mr. Moore, although the fact that only five or six calls were answered through the St. John system might seem to indicate exaggeration. In the light of his explanation people would realise the position. The B.M.A. would regard it as a great pity if the scheme were to collapse. It was working well. Mr. Moore said the B.M.A. had always regarded it as essential that there should be some financial obligation on the patient, as otherwise the burden thrown on the profession would tend to become too great. People would summon a doctor on the slightest pretext If there was nothing to pay. The 8/6 collected from the patient for night calls was not excessive, and the profession was careful to see that those who could not afford it were not penalised. Thus, if the night doctor found that the patient was the wife or child of a man absent in the armed forces, or a pensioner, no fee was asked. The profession was most considerate, as would be generally acknowledged.

Mr. Moore safd the B.MA. was happy in the knowledge that the flight service was being operated by the Hospital Board, through its house surgeons. It was good to have co-operation in a constructive scheme of this sort. The B.M.A. would deeply regret the collapse of the scheme by reason of the Gov ernment's refusal to pay the 12/6 subsidy on the ground that the night service was not being rendered by private practitioners. Every endeavour was being made to continue the scheme on the basis of 8/6 paid by the patient. The association's plan was to pay the salary of the house surgeon on duty, and the whole cost of the scheme, any balance to go to a benevolent fund, so that no individual practitioner should benefit. (See report on Page 3).