WHERE DOCTORS DIFFER

New Zealand Times, Volume XLII, Issue 9794, 18 October 1917, Page 7

WHERE DOCTORS DIFFER

MUCH-EXAMINED RECRUIT INTERESTING CASE DISCUSSED IN PARLIAMENT. The ease of A. J. N. Poison, of Wellington, who, after being examined many times over by iounooa aociois and then sent to camp on the decisions of nine of the medical authorities, was discussed at some length in the House of Representatives yesterday. duo M to L Public Petitions Committee reported to the House that it Had considered the petition of D. M. Pollioa,- father ot the reservist ;u question, praying that his son might ho discharged Irom camp and bo released from military service as being unfit, and had no recommendation to make.

Mr G. Witty (Riccarton) said five doctors had given their opinion that 'the man was unlit. Now, while this unfit man was in camp, there were hundreds of fit men walking about cho country. It was waste of the country’s money to send this man to camp.

Air MicCaUum (Vvairau) said that ii Mr Witty had attended the meeting of the committee lie would have come to the conclusion that the man eoulci be sent to camp. Ho would not ho sent to the front until he was fitNine doctors had examined him aim found him to bo physically ‘ fit. Dr Thacker said he had examined the man, and he was convinced that it was a crime to send him into camp. The fact that ho had been pushed into camp proved that there had hcen wire-pulling. From two examinations of the mau he could see that he could, easily contract meningitis in camp, it would be sad and sickly to send hire into camp. Ho was going to watch this boy in camp, and if he considered it necessary bo -would report his investigations to the House. If nothing were done he would publish the case In every paper in New Zealand. It was really a disgrace to New Zealand. Mr J. 31. Dickson (Chalmers) said that the committee had carolully considered the evidence and was unanimous in the opinion that ho should receive training in camp. After hearing the evidence, the father appeared satisfied with the finding. Air P. O. Webb (Grey) moved that the report bo referred back to the committee. , ~ , Mr L. M, Isitt (Christchurch North) supported the amendment. He said that cases -had come under his notice xvhovo many unfit recruits were sent into camp. It was simply marvellous tho way some doctors acted. Mr AfloCom-bs (Lyttelton) quoted the case of a recruit who was passed into tho camp as fit, although he was renortod as suffering from heart disease. This hoy was now in Irentiiam Gamp in a serious condition. Mr C. H. Poolo (Auckland West) said as a- member of the committee no had no objection to tho report being referred back to the committee. However, ho thought, the attitude of the committee a commendable one, as it was supporting the sending of the boy to camp so that ho might bo caietully watched there and passed out as unfit if necessary. From the number of military petitions being received by the House it would bo neccsary shortly to sot up a- military committee. He would like a Ministerial statement on tho matter. .. ■ . . Sir James Allen considered it would bo -a very dangerous thing to send the petition back to tho committee H would bo establishing a bad precedent. In his military capacity he bad endeavoured always to protect hunsell from influence, and m this respect he did not like to sco these military petitions coming to the House. Ho Knew influence was behind some of them. The Petitions Committee should nor encourage petitions of this nature. t they were granted it would he merely -sapping at tho Milrtaiy ci A A div'isim was called for on M r Webb’s amendment, which was lost oy 44 votes to 20.