THE STRATFORD HOSPITAL.

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXX, Issue 63, 19 June 1916, Page 5

THE STRATFORD HOSPITAL.

DR. PAGET AND THE BOARD.

CHARGES REITERATED. (To Thb Editor Stratford Post,] Sir.—ln reply to Mr McAllister's assertions, I state emphatically that they are contrary to fact and evasions ot I lie truth. My letter was written on Friday, June 16th, and passed into your office that day, and if the Board held a special meeting on that day to consider my complaints why was I not informed and given a chance to be present? I never stated that any application was received by the Board for admission of the soldier referred to. I said he was referred to me, and 1 had to act as I did; this is a fact. As to the refusal of patients for admission for operation, these are the facts: (1) A patient was in the Hospiral (or was admitted to the Hospital) for operation for chronic appendicitis when I first took charge, and was discharged by instruction of Dr. Steven because the Chairman would not make or attempt to make arrangements with mo to operate. (2). I was instructed to defer admitting a patient awaiting operation for varicose veins until Dr. Steven’s return. (3). A patient’s friends rang me np from Huiroa seeking admission for a girl for operation I for chronic appendicitis. I referred them to the Board’s office, and the girl was not admitted. (4). In the cause of common humanity I had to take the soldier referred to previously into my own hospital and could not admit him to the Public Hospital. So much for the Chairman's statements that “no patients whatever have been refused admittance.” As to the Chairman’s reference to . other doctors, I mentioned no other : doctors, nor am I going to question the grounds of confidence the Board , has in its Medical Superintendent and his temporary representative, and 1 } do not intend that the Chairman shall j draw me into a discussion as to the merits of my fellow-practitioners, whom I respect and appreciate. But I emphatically state that in quoting the Inspector-General of Hospitals , I do not believe that when those words appeared in print that the InspectorGeneral knew the conditions prevailing and I am confident that if lie knew them ha would not . approve .them, If I am wrong in this statement o£ ■■ opinion I will give £lO to any of the relief funds you, Sir, may select, and I state that I have had no communication with' tlie Inspector-General on the subject. The Secretary says that the Board > passed a resolution of appreciation and thanks to me for my services. Deeds speak louder than words. The words of “appreciation and thanks” were ( contained in a letter of three clauses. Clause 1 dealt with my complaint to tlie Board of an act of discourtesy and unfairness to me by the Chairman and gross want of proper consideration for the welfare and feeiings of a patient. On the day I took over the Hospital I admitted a severe and dangerous fcfiso of blood-poisoning, requiring great care, close attention, and all the skill I possessed t ( o spve life.'. The patient, and the : patient’s husband,? before the appoint merit "of any locum Jenehs, requested that the cake should hot bo passed over to any other doctor, a natural and reasonable request, considering the extreme gravity of the case and the fact that my experience of the case in its early stages must be of value to the patient. When a locum tenons was secured, the request was renewed, and the patient’s husband and I both saw the Chairman and requested permission for me to continue the attendance without cost to the Board. This request the Chairman refused. Individual members of the Board most emphatically condemned this action of the Chairman, but clause one of the letter attributed it to “a misunderstanding,” which is absolute nonsense, since, unless the Chairman is more stupid than even I take him to be, he could not have “misunderstood,” and, furthermore, the Chair- ■

man defended his action. The real reason was that, irrespective of regard for human life, the natural anxiety and wishes of a sick woman and of her husband, and of course without regard to fairness or courtesy to me, - L he “fixer! policy of the Board” (please put this in capital type), must prevail, mid the “face” of the Chairman be saved!

Clause 2 refused payment for my services to the Board during thirteen days at the Hospital: Thirteen days of the hardest work I hdve ever put in in my life, on the grounds that the Medical Superintendent is responsible for supplying , a locum' tenons. This in spite of the fact that the Medical | Superintendent was taken suddenly land seriously ill, that (owing to war 'conditions a locum tenens was impossible to obtain at once, and in spite of the fact that within a few days of i taking over the Hospital I told the ■ Secretary of the Board (whose Chairman. at least, knew* I was doing the work), that I should expect the Board to meet my reasonable charges for the work, and asked that arrangements should be made accordingly. What would the Board and the ratepayers have thought if I had refused to do the work without a legal agreement as to conditions of work and payment therefor > Clause 3 contained a .(refusal to consider my charge against the Board of failing to make arrangements for operative work of an urgent nature, arid these words; “That its (sincere thanks are due to you for your work at the Hospital.” To which I (reply that the pen may be mightier than the sword, but it- can not confer in empty words the power of nullifying deeds. Mr McAllister hedges himself round with red-tape entanglement of rules to avoid paying my just dues and hangs his red red tape to parts of “a fixed policy” to excuse his act of gross I want of consideration and discourtesy :to a patient and to myself. Now, Sir, w’hen some years ago I resigned the position of Medical Superintendent to Abe Stratford Hospital owing to acts (of interference with my private practice by certain members of the Board, I adopted a “fixed policy,” which was: Not to do any work or give and services in the Hospital. Others were there to do it. and I-'did not want it. Then the jwiK br(»|ife*jint. and Dr. Carbary's Immnil'-teqmk'' was withdrawn, so, refusing |pjtake advantage of war conditions tosinqtpi>e< the Board, I immediately inferiatecl to the Medical Superintendent iny readiness to render Bssistaiipet? j(s anaesthetist, or in conon?' the slmc terras as the . medical' men previously here, had settled, and since then I have worked harmoniously and cordially with him. When he wms taken ill I assumed the whole of the work of his private practice, as he had de«e for me on a previous and similar occasion, until a locum tenens could be obtained, and ,in addition, at his request, I assumed charge of the Hospital and did my best there, informing the Secretary of the fact and that I should expect the Board to meet my reasonable charges and make arrangements re operative w ork with me.

j In return for relieving the Board of its paramount duty'of a substitute for.:its Medical Supliuiteiideut, which, o%ing to his sud ?n illness it, despite ly “rules” or “fixeiPfmlicies” 1 re< ive a slap in the face from the Chai nan and a rude rebuff-from the Boar< and (don’t forget it) a resolution of [>preclation and thanks! Lot .me, th -efore, announce my “fixedylpolicy. which is this: That since the Boaril mistakes generosity for weakness I shall withdraw my services from the Hospital until (1) I receive an apology from the Chairman or the Board for his discourteous action and unfair treatment; (2) I have received adequate remuneration from the Board for my services., Such remuneration to he decided by the In-spector-General of Hospitals after hearing both sides. (3) The fixed policy” of the Board is so far unfixed” as to allow the Board to render decent treatment and courtesy to those deserving it; to show,proper consideration for the welfare and feelings of parents, including, giving mo the right to treat my own cases in the Hospital without having to ask a favor and be discourteously refused it and not as heretofore, be lorced to pass over to another, patients I hsve treated for years, when I am prepared to render gratuitous treatment h) the Public Hospital to those whdSe position demands it. 1 ask no ftmuneraum from the Board for this concession, ; neither would I take it. ,1 meie y ■claim the right to continue to attend 'those I have attended for years and 'not have their want of wealth an ex'cuso for depriving them of their right !to the gratuitous services lam willing ‘and anxious to give. Miucris a “fixed * DollC^ l etc. I 1" ‘ • T. L. PAGET.