SCHOOL DENTISTRY

Dominion, Volume 14, Issue 48, 20 November 1920, Page 9

SCHOOL DENTISTRY

- MINISTER'S SCHEME CRITICISED OPINIONS OP DEAN OP DENTAL FACULTY -Br Teleararh—Press Association . Dunedin, November 19. -. Mr. Pickerill, Dean of tho Dental l'';in- '.' Ultv in the University of Otago, seen • 10-day with reference to the Minister'spronouncement- concerning, the Stato school of dentistry scheme, made the fol-lowing-statement :—"I consider New Zea--1 and is to be congratulated upon having a Minister of Public Health and Education who takes such a keen interest in .such an important matter as the dental! treatment of' school ohildren. It is, tis he rightly says, .a vital matter affecting the health and welfare of the rising and succeeding .generations. A State, school dental service has. been -urgently needed for some years past, and now that it has . been inaugurated it behoves all coneorri- .. Ed to ■ see .that it is developed on lines "lyhich will deal -adequately, justly, ami fairly, with the. situation. Is that being .. done? *-I i :think not. . There -are two classes of-the people who arc most directly concerned: the taxpayers,- who will . pay for the dental treatment, and the children who receive it, and the present . , (proposed) system is neither .just to the •. taxpayers nor fair to' the children. The ... people; the taxpayers of New Zealand, should realise that the scheme is already • partially in operation. A few qualified dentists are ' being appointed ' to deal , with single individual schools; and only thoso children .attending that particular school will receive,'the benefit of free " State dentistry. The parents'of the cliil-. .' ; dren .attending. all -the other "schools Svill liave to pay tor this/benefit conferred on ; other people's children; as .well ns pay .privately foi 4 -their : own children—a seri,;ous disability in these days-of high cost of living; .larther; these State dentists ■ are being appointed to the' four chief centres where dental hospitals for tho treatment of, children already exist, and the 'smaller towns are,-being neglected. Is i this fair to the taxpayers in, sajV Oam- . aru, • Ashburton. JEasterton, and. Hamil,'i;„ton? Is it doing, a fair , thing for the 'Suffering. children of .these towns-' ''But, most important of all, 'it /is ; proposed to', neglect all serious'cases of v ...dental disease 1 anftjonly jjeal' with tlie ;t !tnvial # .and' simple cases :(tbis presumably in order, that partially-trained ; wnen may.bo employed for the work)? Does'the Minister realise' that' what at =■present-'is-thegreat menace; to., tho health, of the New Zealand school'children/ is" oral sepsis?. Septic infection • from'advanced. dental caries,'.whidhbids • fair to; poison • their systems And- uhder- • "mino-theii; constitution,' , The trivial. •Simple cavities for" the present 'do not . -matter. . Tho "duty-of tho State is to ; tmt .tho more -urgent cases first, but I that is not to be done. All the bad cases. scholars in the standards throughout Zealand tre to be''jettisoned 'and their • health ; l and welfare (as far as their $ : teeth aftect this) are to ;bo intentionally . thrown • 1b •• tihfe "winds, neglected—only those,,children with, little,holes in their teeth are to be treated. *• Surely 'this is not fair to the children in Standard I . J 6 *! 3 * half of whom are suffering from pain, and • abscesses, and other : forms of sepsis... I am' satisfied that no 5 medical man in New Zealand who has . ; of. the effects/ of, oral ' sepsisrrfew / have .• not—would 'sanction such ; a scheme. Tor instance,, the v Mrs. J A.' .have extremely, bad teeth, and .their health is- siifferin o, ac-' ' S?r«Wf ; ' ;i They:, get .n6 .'.treatment. ?r rs ,*;.B,s-little children have compara- • tively. good, teeth, they get all the Cental treatment .they require free at the Mates expense. Surely, the system Is ■ obviously fair neither to taxpayers nor children, ■ ■ "What do I,suggest? Well, in the iiret place, a sufficiency of well-paid, . pitopeidy-quaJified!. dentjsM tvho alone shouhiybe trusted to operate on the children. They can .be obtained if tlie otate tvill pay them; and the service is made attractive. -. Tlio Dental School • after nest year will be turning out 20 per annum. These trill be quite enough •to keep thojservice growing and develop- 1 "Ut. 111 years, more'than siiffi-" fcient iyith v , the 'gospel "of prevention to eliminate Practienlly (ill' the sepsis from t_lio mouths of. New Zealand children. Secondly, to facilitate the work, the training'and. appointment of' dental . . Burses - who - should on no account - l>e allowed-to,?.operate, but'to act in the rolo .of. a, dentist's, attendant. Is the best too good for. the children? ..Why, . then, should they be. subjected to being ...operated upon (as is proposed) by half--1 trained tvornon, and if these women are . good enough; .for/the children, why are they not good anoiigb for their parents? But, if tho ■ Jlinister.;says, they are not to, bo allowed, to operate tipon' the publie, why, should they be allowed. to >do -. .so upop.the children?-Thirdly,.the treat- . cases. First ..of all, .the.desirability of- this is obvious • to.:any..layman....Fourthly; the establish-' ■ •••• weijA in the' .first instance ,of : dental ;|liitSc« in the. smaller.,towns where.:no ... - facilities .-exist- for, the chil-' . udren.. Eifthly,.'.the provision. 'of.dental - " niotor-ambulancesifor tlie children,in the:

• backblocks • nnd scattered country'. dis- . tricts. .: Sixthly, the, children...to .be selected for_dental treatment .by the • school medical officors who lire already, . from my- own -knowledge, well experi- .. flnced in -this-work. The .children 're- -. quiring -treatment would ■ then at' .• - tend tho dental clinics in rotation. Fina/Iy,'lt should_bo'laid down as .a prim' erv/ principle 'in .a democratic country ~-i. siich'rts. this,. equal .opportunities -for 'all - -and help for those who n?ed it'most.'" ;