POLICY OF PALMERSTON HOSPITAL.

Shannon News, 12 May 1925, Page 2

POLICY OF PALMERSTON HOSPITAL.

NO DISCRIMINATION REGARDING ADMITTANCE. The question of .whether the Palmerston North Hospital authorities had th e power to discriminate against any patient being accepted in the institution on account of his financial position was discussed at length at .■Saturday’s meeting ol the Horowhenua County Council, as the result of a letter received from the Kiwitea C.oun-, ty Council, inclosing a copy of the v .nmiissioiier’s report on the recent enquiry into {be circumstances relating to the treatment of a daughter of Mr J. J. Bryce, of that County, whilst u patient ol the Palmerston North Hospital, and generally as to tlie administration of the Palmerston North Hospital. They stated that as ihe result of the inquiry they were convinced that the matter of administration should be gone into and reforms instituted in the direction of making them open to people of all classes. Other alterations in policy were also> suggested. Tlie chairman (Cr. G. A. Monk) said that he had studied carefully the reports ol' the Commission. As far as he could see the Kiwitea County Council had ibeen behind Mr Bryce throughout the whole matter, which had been staged with the object of bringing about the inquiry. He thought that there were few people in New Zealand who would hold that the findings of Mr Page, S.M., .the Commissioner, would he workable from, an Hospital point of view. It * was not a fact that Miss Bryce had been refused admission to the hospital but after getting there, there was the question of whether an operation should be performed or otherwise. There was no question at any time as. to whether Mr Bryce was in a position to pay for treatment elsewhere, and regarding the question 0.whether an operation should be performed or not, he .would say that- tins was in the hands of the medical staff, and a matter on which a layman could not pass an opinion. The Kiwitea County Council asked that when accommodation was short., discrimination regarding admission should be in the hands qf an outside person. This was trying to introduce what the Hospital Board was doing its best to keep out—namely a question of tlie financial position of the patient. It was also suggested that the charges should be increased so that an adequate fee might be paid to honorary surgeons, but he was of opinion that if ilie charges were raised from 9s to 15s has had been suggested elsewhere, there wo.uld be less of the l ees < M >I - Jected tliuu at present, us the small difference between 15s arid, the charge at a private hospital would send the people who could pay, to the latter institutions. He wished to emphasise again that no person was refused admission to the hospital, and secondly that no inquiry was made by the medical stair, or honorary surgeons, as to the financial position- of patients. He could not, recommend that a letter be'supported. . , Cr. Ryder said that the medical practitioners were running the private hospitals and did what they could to prevent people going into the publicinstitutions. A public hospital, for everybody tvas what was destred, and the "private hospmls should he condemned thoroughly. . Cr. Broadbelt supported the chairman’s remarks. Cr. Catley said that it was strange, if there was no discrimination, that after Miss Bryce had been admitted, an inquiry had been instituted as to her father’s financial position. After investigating her case and determining that it was not a case for immediate operation, it was not said that one was hot necessary—indeed it was afterwards found necessary. The chairman said that he was uot rr.oinn- to sav that there had not been discrimination after Miss Biryce bad been admitted. What be wanted to sav was that there was no discrimination in the case of admittance. Cr Jensen held that the choice c whether a medical, man should-treat anv particular case or otherwise should not be left in their hands. Once a patient was admitted, treatment should be compulsory The letter was received.