MENTAL SUFFERERS.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CXV, Issue 16486, 27 February 1914, Page 9

MENTAL SUFFERERS.

TO THE EDITOR, Sir, —The Canterbury Women’s Institute recently made a reference to the present treatment of the insane, evidently based on- the recent Sunnyside inquiry. Permit mo now to point out that the report of Mr Day, S.M., was not the last word on the subject. I endeavoured to point out this fact at the time, but unfortunately my letter could not be published. Mr Day in liis report devoted fifty-one lines to show that the regulation clothing worn by the patients was necessary, and oould not possibly be avoided. In private asylums in England' the patients all wear their own. clothes, and the arrangements for doing so are most simple and arc carried out without the slightest difficulty. Just think of the distressing effect the wearing of regulation clothing must inevitably have on many of the patients. At Sunnyside it appeared that it was a trouble even to return the few effects of those patients that die in the institution.

In dealing with the charges made 1 against the staff,' I will mention one case as an example, A .patient received two black eyes.. Mr Day stated,, . “In his opinion the injuries were, caused by the patient himself falling about his room.” There was no evidence to support this theory; the man was not suffering from any physical complaint and no one saw him do it. The theory originated from two attendants. Mi- Day. minutely described the cell in which this patient was confined, and either the two attendants or Mr Day should have enlightened us as to how the structure of the cell,; or . whatever it was, could account - for two black eyes at one and the sanie time. The evidence of the doctor was rather interesting. In referring to a patient he said this man had the sense afterwards to hide his delusions," Here we have “a lunatic with senseand “a lunatic that can hide his delusions.” - ' - ' ' -Z‘:

Tho same doctor also stated that patients sometimes complained that they were not examined, not recognising that conversation was a form of examination. I am not in a position to know whether there "were any: grounds for the complaint or not, but the doctor’s statement reveals * the fact that the law in New Zealand is giving no • protection to the patients whatever. There is no system of examination in existence, _provided by law. While visiting England some years ago I noticed a case before the Supreme Court, a man suing the asylum authorities for detention covering a period of nine years. I can understand the difficulties of proving such a case, with the present loose arrangements in .existence. In New Zealand we had the case at Waihi of a perfectly sane .man not. only committed to an asylum as a riunatic but detained there as such. The Waihi case an isolated one, but after tho evidence given at the Sunnysids inquiry there is evidently nothing t< prevent such an occurrence, ana w 4 have never been favoured with any ex-« planation of the Waihi case. Possibly the authorities have none to offer.

. Another grave feature of the present system appeared in. the doctor 1 * evidence. It appears he .told a wif<E that the patient (her husband) indulg« ed in -filthy practices, and he. (the doctor) admitted lie "..uU done this on the strerigfch of a nightwatchman’s report. Tms man takes three-quarters of an hour to his round, and his opinion of the case could not be very reliable, to say the least.' The practice of. doctors ...telling the unfortunate patients’ friends or. relatives or such mutters would .only:inflict the most intense mental - 'suffering- on/ the friends, and can serve no useful: purpose whatever. I cannot comment, on this proceeding, as I could not do so in moderate language.—l am, etc., CITIZEN