OFFICIAL VIEW OF DR. HOWARD

NZ Truth, Issue 1261, 30 January 1930, Page 7

OFFICIAL VIEW OF DR. HOWARD

MATRON STEVENSON REINSTATED AT AVONLEA HOSPITAL ' DISMISSAL DEPRECATED BY HEALTH DEPARTMENT

(From "N.Z. Truths Taumarunui Representative.) When "N.Z, Truth," a few weeks ago, urged a full and impartial inquiry into the dismissal, without any reasons being stated, of the matron of Avonlea Maternity Hospital, by the Taumarunui Hospital Board, it based its argument on the simple principle of British fair play. Such an inquiry has now been concluded, and as a result of it the matron has been reinstated.

ON November. 18 last, Miss M. K. Stevenson was handed a letter giving her three months' notice of the .termination of her engagement as Matron of the Avonl4a Maternity Hospital. No reasons were assigned for this drastic action by the Taumarunui Hospital Board, by whom she was employed. - '„«•' She asked for an explanation of her extraordinary treatment, but was given none. • It later appeared that the Board had largely based its action of a confidential report submitted by the "medical superintendent of Avonlea, Dr. Howard, concerning Sister .Stevenson. The Board apparently accepted all this report contained as gospel and decided that the matron must go. The next episode m this extraordinary situation, was when Dr. ' Howard, gave the matron a testimonial that was quite inconsistent with. his report, to the Board. - Meanwhile, before the Board's* next meeting, certain things came to the ears of different members, and Mr. R. V. Pickin insisted upon more light being thrown upon the matron's dismissal. A special meeting of the Board was held and both Dr. Howard and Miss Stkvenspn were heard. - The Proper Oourse Two members particularly, Messrs. Pickin and Dougherty, insisted that fair treatment had not been accorded the matron, and finally a -Departmental enquiry, which "Truth" insisted was the proper course to, adopt m order jto ascertain' the true position, was decided upon. -.'■**. The report of this enquiry, which was conducted by Dr. Shore, of the Health Department, exonerates Matron Stevenson from any blame m the administration, of the institution. Dr. Shore found, as a result of his investigations, no reason why the Board should dispense with _ the services of the matron. Despite this, certain members seemed reluctant to admit that a grave, mistake Wad been made, and when a motion was carried to reinstate vher, they then sought another, means of getting rid of her, by a , proposal , to transfer control of Avonlea to the Matron of the Taumarunui Public Hospital and place a sister m charge of Avonlea. A resolution was, m fact, moved ■ and seconded to this effect, but an amendment to hold the matter . over for three months," carried by the supporters pf Miss Stevenson, overrode the motion. * An impartial tribunal decided that there was nothing to justify the Board m the drastic action it took, •m tbe face of this, the Board could not do otherwise than climb down from the bureaucratic pinnacle on which it had placed itself, although two of the members, Mr. R. F. Beautrais and Mr. McLeod refused to be a party to the descent. , * ■ ■ . The chairman (Mr. Beautrais), at the meeting at which Dr. Shore's report was read, said he considered he was just as capable of summing up the position and of making a correct deduction from the evidence as Dr.Shore. ■ In a covering letter to D,r. Shore's report, Dr. Valintine, Inspector-general of Hospitals, .said it appeared to him as if •'there a certain 'element of injustice m the Board's action m dismissing the matron. In his report, Dr. Shore states:^----"All' the doctors who. attend at Avonlea state that they are quite satisfied with Miss Stevenson's knowledge and ability. Two of the doctors concerned, namely Drs. Howard and Fisher, stated that they considered, for reasons other than professional, Miss Stevenson was not fit to . occupy the position. « Received Complaint "The reasons ( given chiefly were that she showed a lack of dignity and tact, and was rowdy and uncouth. "The other doctor, however,. Dr. "Vivian, who does the bulk of the work at Avonlea, expressed himself as being perfectly satisfied with : Miss Stevenson's conduct, both from a professional point of view and from an administrative aspect. "I found it quite impossible to get any definite complaint capable of proof against Miss Stevenson. As an instance of this, I may quote that I received a complaint that n Miss Stevenson on New Year's Eve about 6 p.m., made a statement m a shop m! Taumarunui .derogatory to a patient ,m the institution under her control. "The persons, making this complaint were quite willing that •ly should mention the matter to Miss Stevenson, and gave their names. I did so and Miss Stevenson asked me to call on the proprietor of the shop and he,' on being interviewed, said he had no recollection of any remark of such . a nature, or the stated nature, being made. . . . '. . "The chairman of the Board also .stated that he could, if necessary, bring evidence to show that the matron had not given the patients adequate attention, and the matron said she could bring evidence to show that the patients were quite satisfied. "It was evident, therefore, that to follow or enlarge the enquiry on any of the lines indicated above, could lead. to no conclusive .results. ; "I had an. interview with the Board, and indicated that while, as the controlling' authority of thej Taumarunui Maternity Hospital, they were quite within their rights m dispensing with the services of an employee after \due notice, I could find no reason why they should dispense with the services of Miss Stevenson." Surely, after Such a statement foi-' lowing an impartial- enquiry, the least the Board could have done was to have reinstated Miss Stevenson. Not so with the Taumarunui Board, however. There was even a somewhat acrid discussion as to whether, the report should merely be formally received, and^wheh reinstatement was decided upon, it was not unanimous and was followed by the motion already referred to for a reduction* of status. > . The report of Dr. Shore also stated: "I pointed out to the Board that vague statements as to uncouthness and lack

of tact could scarcely be interpreted as reasons for dismissal." Then comes this somewhat serious statement against the matron's chief accuser: "1 consider also that the medical superintendent, Dr. Howard, has never fulfilled his position as medical . administrator of the Avonlea Maternity Hospital. "For instance, m March, 1929, he stated that he had conducted an enquiry as to why the whole staff resigned at that period, but he made no report or retepmmendation to the Boai'd. In fact the Board had no knowledge that Dr. Howard had ever conducted such an enquiry. "I cannot see how Dr. toward can justify his action m puttinfe m a private and confidential report which is vaguely derogatory to the matron, and, immediately after, supplying her with a good testimonial. "Dr. Howard certainly states that his 'testimonial is qualified, but I doubt if this statement would convey to any person other than Dr. Howard anything but that he was quite satisfled with her services." v The report adds: "I cannot but express my opinion that much of the feeling that exists between various members of the staff of the Taumarunui Hospital Board, and possibly some members of the Board themselves, and the matron of Avonlea, is largely personal." Dr. Shore then proceeded to make certain recommendations for the future control of Avonlea, which he considers would he better under the direct control of the matron and superintendent of the General Hospital. He also sees no reason why the Board should have a separate medical superintendent for Avonlea. A long discussion followed the reading of the report. This mostly concerned the reinstatement of Miss Stevenson and the reorganisation of the hospital. . The/ chairman said that with all due respect to Dr. Shore," he (Mr. Beautrais) considered his own capabilities of deduction from the evidence equal to those of Dr. Shore." 1 7 ' Mr. Beautrais complained that Dr. Shore should have accepted all evidence that would have thrown light on the situation, but he had not done so. He did not think Dr. Shore had been fair to Dr. How- > ard, who .was simply a figurehead and had possibly allowed things to carry pn without interfering. There had never been any trouble before the advent of Miss Stevenson. Mr. Beautrais denied th v at there was any personal feeling between him and Miss Stevenson. Should be Careful He thought they should be cai'eful before reinstating her, for if t^hey did reinstate her they would be admitting that they had been unjust. The chairman was backed up m his attitude also by Mr. Dennison, who, while moving a motion that the matron be reinstated, moved also for a reorganisation of the staff. He said he. considered Miss Stevenson unfitted? for the position, and added that if he thought there was a possibility of her remaining m the Board's employ, -he would not vote for her reinstatement/, Mr. Dennison proceeded that he did not like admitting that the Board had made a 'mistake, but he was 'prepared to do it. Mr. Pickin declared that the Board had not one iota of evidence to warrant its dismissing Miss Stevenson. Mr. Dougherty. agreed, an.d said Dr. Shore had described the evidence as all piffle. The chairman: That is just a matter of opinion. I claim, that the Board had ample cause for, dismissing Miss Stevenson. The Health Department's officer cam£ here with a file and did not produce it. Had we seen the file we perhaps could have challenged some of the statements. The motion by Mr. Dennison, "That the resolution passed on November 16 giving Miss Stevenson, matron of the maternity hospital, three months' notice, be rescinded, 1 and that the matter of tlie reorganisation of the staff be considered," was carried, the chairman and Mr. McLeod voting against it. - Mr. Dennison then moved that the control of Avonlea be placed under the control of the matron of the ' general hospital, with a sister m charge, and that applications be' called for the position of sister at £160 per annum. Mr./ McLeod seconded the motion. Mr. Pickin saw no cause for the suggested change and said the home would suffer from being attached to the general ihospital. He moved an amendment that the matter be deferred for three months m order to give members time to consider the advisability or otherwise of the change. The amendment was carried, Messrs. McLeod and Dennison voting m opposition. While "Truth" holds no brief for Miss Stevenson, and is not prepared to say whether she is or is not a fit and proper person to occupy the position of jmatron of Avonlea, this paper still emphatically maintains that she was done a distinct injustice 'in being dismissed without any "reason being assigned, and, as has proved to be the case from the i-enort of Dr. Shore, without just cause.