SCARLET FEVER.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CXVII, Issue 17279, 21 September 1916, Page 4

SCARLET FEVER.

CHARGE OF EXPOSING CLOTHES WITHOUT DISINFECTION.

CASE AGAINST G. T. BOOTH DISMISSED.

Further medical opinion was heard at tho Magistrate’s Court yesterday, before Mr T. A. B. Bailey, S.M., in tho case in which G. T. Booth was charged, at the instance of tho Public Health Department, with knowingly exposing infected clothes without first disinfecting them. At tho earlier hearing the case for the prosecution had not closed. Mr Lane appeared for the informant and Mr. Wright for tho defendant. Dr Scott, superintendent at the Christchurch Hospital, gave it as his opinion that in visiting the patient’s room and afterwards mixing with the public Mr Booth had taken a risk. The Christchurch Hospital had been closed to visitors on account of scarlet fever cases and so also had the mental hospital. Everybody entering the isolation wards woio . a gown. Sinco the Hospital had been closed, two cases of scarlet fever had occurred in tho general wards, and he thought it likely that infection hail been carried from the isolation ward by a member of the staff. ‘To Mr Wright: There was more risk in an overcrowded hospital than in a private house under proper isolation. There had been about a dozen mastoid patients at the Christchurch Hospital. He remembered two Sumner children beam sent from Bottle Lake Hospital to Christchurch Hospital allegedly suffering from measles. They turned out to have scarlet fever. He believed that the Sumner doctor had originally diagnosed tho cases as scarlet fever, and notified them. The Bottle Lako staff had made a faulty diagnosis. No scarlet fever cases had occurred after their admission at Christchurch. Dr Scott, further cross-examined, said that ho had heard that scarlet fever had occurred in tho Chxdren’s Ward after children from other wards had been allowed to visit it. Mr Wright said that although Mr Booth was charged with an offence, he could prove that the Hospital Board and Health Department were the greatest sinners. Dr Crooke, recalled, gave evidence that when he was in charge of the Christchurch Hospital he used to visit the scarlet fever ward twice daily, but always did so in a special suit of clothes, which were kept in disinfectant. Ho changed and bathed after leaving the ward. Everybody should wear an overall on visiting a scarlet fever To Mr Wright: Ho knew of several cases in which the cases could not be admitted to Bottle Lake. In one instance a case had occurred m a family of seven chi’dren. and although the woman wanted the caso to go to Bottle Lako she had to keep tho child at home, isolated. BOTTLE LAKE HOSPITAL. Dr Duncan, in charge' of Bottlo Lake, said that Mr Booth had been liable to carry infection. The disease was likely to bo carried by a third person. Mr Wright: Is it true that young children have to bath themselves at Bottlo Lake? Witness: Ido not think so. Mr Wright: In the discharged wards have boys and girls been put in the samo bed together. Witness: I think'not. Mr Wright: Will you deny it if T produce a sworn statement that it lias been done. The witness protested that the matter was irrelevant. The Magistrate supported the objection, remarking that he was not there to try Bottle Lake. , Mr Wright said that it could bo proved that a little while ago there was ample reason for an inquiry at Bottle Lake. Mr Lane said that that matter could be brought up in the proper way. Mr Wright said that be had affidavits that proved the need for an inquiry. The witness added that Bottle Lake was overcrowded. There were about 170 cases. The normal accommodation was fortv or fifty. Tho Magistrate protested that this vrns irrelevant. Mr Wright said that lie was to be judged on irrelevant evidence. Ho asked whether them should be one standard for a public institution and another for a private house. Dr W. H. Simpson said that there was a risk of a third rrirtv carrying the disease, and he had documentary statements that the disease had been carried bv two healthy subjects. To Mr Wright: A man might carry infection for years if he wore the samo clothes. To Mr Wright: He would keep a patient isolated for six weeks. DISTRICT HEALTH. OFFICERS’ OPINIONS. Dr Hughes, District Health Officer at Auckland, said that anybody acting like Mr Booth would be likely to carry the infection, as it was very tenacious. To Mr "Wright; Directions were given by the inspectors in Auckland,_ but there were no printed instructions other than those issued to schools. It would be wise to have printed instructions. . Dr Smith, District Health Officer at Dunedin, gave corroborative evidence. Ho said it was absolutely absurd to say that the germ would not live ten feet in the air. Dr Temple gave evidence on the same lines, and instanced two cases in his own experience where infection was carried hv n third party. F. E. Bettel, tho board’s inspector, recalled, said that ori .June 23 he saw Mr Booth at liis office, and repeated tile complaint that he lind been in tho habit of entering the room. He replied that it was not true, and explained the precautions that lie lmd taken to avoid infection. Ho told Mr Booth that nobody but the nurse must entor tho room.

DEFENDANT GIVES EVIDENCE. Mr Lano proceeded to call Mr Booth, but tho Magistrate informed him that lie had no right to do so. Mr Wright offered no objection, and Mr Booth was Sworn in. Mo said that when his daughter became ill, his wife was away; and there were only two maids in the house. When Dr Synics diagnosed tho case ho engaged a nurse. Ho did not know what instructions Dr Syrocs gave to tho servants. He asked the doctor" if it would bo necessary for him to avoid the room, and ho replied that it was not, because the case was very mild and lfo was not likely to carry it. ' But ho had advised him to discontinue his visits to the Sanatorium and hospital, and avoid contact with the children. had followed tho instructions. Dr Semeshad tokl him not to visit, tho hospitals, remarking that if there was an outbreak there lie might he blamed for it. It was fortunate that ho did so, as there was an outbreak there. He was not given to understand that there was any danger of infection. He had heard of no instructions being given by the inspector. Tho Magistrate again expressed surprise that the Department was spending so many thousands of pounds on the disease and yet could not print the instructions. To Mr "Wright: He had not “knowingly ” exposed his clothes. As ho was in the room principally in the evenings, ho made as great chango

of clothes as appeared customary among doctors. - - This closed the caso for tho prosecution. NO CASE TO ANSWER. The Magistrate, in reply to Mr Wright, said that he quite agreed that there was no case to answer* Mr Wright said that it was most regrettable that the Department should have brought the case again. The Magistrate sairl that ho did not know why the second prosecution was brought unless there might have been some doubt as to why ho dismissed the first case. Ho had done so because it had to be proved that the. defendant had knowingly exposed his clothes. In Mr Booth’s case some inspector had told somebody something, and apparently the Department was very lax about a serious tiling. Instructions should bo given to tho householder, and not only should they be printed, but regulations should be printed dealing with every case. . Mr Booth had carried out his doctor’s instructions, -he caso was dismissed. DEFENDANT AWARDED COSTS. Mr Wright asked for costs, stating that ho had been prepared with a great many medical witnesses to show that there wits another side to the question. , ,*.l Mr Lane said that *ho caso had been brought to ventilate the matter. The Magistrate said that lie agreed with the doctors that precautions were necessary, but ho would award costs. A MATTER OF ISOLATION. DEFENDANT FINED 10s. William Hann pleaded guilty to a charge oi failing to promptly and satis-, factoriiy comply wild the directions ot the Health Officer in regard to the isolation of a scarlet fever patient.. . > > A. W. Niccol, inspector to the board, said that all that had been asked was that Hann should coniine himself to one room, and have his meals away from home. Ho had declined to do so, or allow the child to go to Bottle Lake. W. J. Chappell said that he served an order on Haiin to let tho child go to Bottlo Lako. Hann made some very uncomplimentary remarks about Bottle Lake, and declined to let the child go; Hann stated that his boy got scarlet fever from tho day school. As soon as he had any suspicion about tho case he warned the neighbours not to ‘et the children come about. The boy was put in bed for nino days, and then seemed to recover, but the doctor pronounced the case to be a very mild case of scarlet fever. He declined to isolate the boy, as' ho was not likely to carry infection, working outside, and he could not afford to board out. Neither his wife nor any of the other children went outside the gate for eight w’osks* ‘‘You refused,?’ said Mr Lane, “to allow the child to go to. Bottle Lako. “Certainly,” said the defendant, “as any other father would. They came round on the coldest, wettest morning of the year, and expected me to let that healthy boy leave his warm home and go to an overcrowded infectious hospital, from which he would have come back with a. good deal more than lie ever had in' liis life.” . A fine of 10s and costs was imposed.