MATERNAL MORTALITY.

Shannon News, 8 July 1924, Page 2

MATERNAL MORTALITY.

(To the Editor). Sir,—Your correspondents “Gammon Sense” and “A Three Days’ Victim” have entirely misunderstood my letter. My motive in writing was to show what a splendid institution Sit. Helens is for a working man’s wife, as they don’t take people with means as patients., 1 have spent five and a half months as an in-patient in St. Helens, Wellington—seven weeks on one occasion—whiAi will showi that, lam not favoured by Nature any more than other women. Neither am I the heartless unsympathetic creature “Common-Sense” implies. I sympathise sincerely with any woman who haa, or is, about to undergo - the pains of childbirth. But why blame St. Helens for most of the hospital cases among women. Can either of your correspondents answer these few questions: Has either of them had more experience as a patient in St. Helens than I have? Why do so many good doctors of both sexes advise itheir patients to go to St. Helens for confinement? Why do so many women come such iong distances, even from Hamilton and even for , their sixth and seventh children? If the cruelties practiced there are so inhuman? Why do those women came again and again? Even the most ignorant women know how essential the despised “good food,' perfect rest, etc.” are.to the nursing mother. I quite agree with your correspondent that we badly need a good modem nursing home in Shannon, but why if she despises St. Helens so much, does she want to send the poor mother who is unahle to pay there-to undergo the crueltijes that women who can pay axe to be saved from. Who usually have the large families?— not those who can afford them, ft seems that the wretched poor are another question.—l am, etc., A MOTHER OF FIVE.