DOCTOR AND PATIENT.

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 532, 12 June 1909, Page 10

DOCTOR AND PATIENT.

;:•'■> !.;.A QUESTION- OF, ;'•'-(bt TBiiiasipn.—sriciii. ctmskaroNDiNTJ '• f: ',''. .;, ■ " : ?.' T iune 11. ; ,-An interesting claim was".heard at tho Darfield Magistrate's Court, whou a labouroi Was sued for ten guineas to-day, the amount charged by a mcdloal matt for .-attendance-on ■his wife.. It transpired that, owing to tho patient,.,.the;.dqctor- had summoned bis brother, also a doctor, from .Christchurch, and a serious, but,successful, operation had been performed. The defence was,, that the doctor ; who first attended the. patient could. hayo- porformed tho opftratiori .without' calling in hi 3 brother, but that this cgurso had been decided vipo'n owing to the two being in co-operation. . This allegation was denied, , it. being, pointed.out that it would have been distinctly dangorous for ono modical mau to attempt tho operation. Further, it was stated, that as defendant had raised objections, to the amount charged, the country doctor had foregone hie cbargo altogether, and. the whole , of, tho amount recoverod was to be paid to tho consultant doctor. .'...'";' ' ~

■The Magistrate, - in giving judgment, said that country, doctors '; he know from personal experience; ofton took great risks....ln this .case the doctor -had felt it would not be advisable- to'take tha risk, /when it ;was .only i -matter of. telephoning: to 'the. .city '.to get ;help: within a short space of time: ;.It was certainly: unfortunate that the defendant had not been present at tho time,- in whioh event he-would.,.;doubtless, have boen consulted.as to-which doctor should be summoned, it being out of tho question, of course, to consult tho patient,'in the condition slio'jvas in. i Before ho would believe'the plaintiff had

not, neted properly,- he would require to be satisfied that the condition of the patient was not critical onoMfth to warrant another doctor being summoned. He .did not think tlio chaTRO :iv_as excessive. Judgment'would ,be for plaintiff for the full nmoirnt. "■'■■'■ -■■■■■Cffimsel for plaintiff-snid that now -plaintiff's character had been cleared, defendant could "pay Tj'hiit he likwl. Tho question'was entirely one of principle. ■ '-.■!• . At a lnW'"stnr;e, counsel for tho defence .expressed . his. satisfaction' at the magnanimous way. in which the plaintiff had treated defendant, anrl further, stated that another case of a similar nature had been amicably settled by tho.two parties.