Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

DOCTORS NOT UNANIMOUS!

New Infectious Diseases Block FIVE TO ONE AGAINST ARE the medical men of Auckland in favour of the Hospital Board’s proposal to build a new infectious diseases block in the Domain site below the main hospital buildings? This morning The Sun conducted a series of tabloid interviews with general practitioners and specialists. The weight of opinion was against the scheme in the proportion of over five to one.

The question as to whether or not medical men favoured the move to establish an infectious diseases block below the main hospital and in the heart of Auckland was a point at issue at yesterday’s meeting of the Auckland Hospital Board. Messrs. W. Wallace, chairman, and E. H. Potter, principal champions of the board’s scheme, declared, in effect, that medical men generally were practically unanimously in favour of it. This was the basis and substance of their contention that the scheme should proceed. They supported the board’s proposal in the face of a petition from Grafton residents, an appeal from a deputation representing the National Council of Women, and a strong protest from Dr. E. B. Gunson, who claimed that a strong section of medical opinion was against the scheme. To ascertain the truth, The Sun this morning sought the opinion of Auckland medical men. Doctors are busy men and many were unavailable, but 23 were interviewed, their names being taken in alphabetical order and without special selection. The result was: In favour of the board’s proposal .. 3 Against the proposal .. 16 Non-committal 4 The question put by The Sun to physicians, surgeons and specialists was:—Are you in agreement with the Hospital Board’s decision to erect an infectious diseases block on the Domain site below the main hospital buildings ? Here are the replies: Dr. W. N. Abbott: They have not got to grips with the problelh. Questions of quarantine and town planning come into it. It has not been considered properly, and, without further information, I could not give an opinion. Dr. E. D. Aubin: I would have no objection as long as the nurses were kept entirely separate. That is the main thing. Dr. G. P. Baldwin: It is the wrong site. I am against it. Mr. R. M. Beattie: I am not in favour of it. Dr. H. C. Bennett: I consider it against the interests of the community in general. Dr. W. S. Brockway: I have not gone into the question sufficiently to

be able to give a definite opinion. Speaking superficially. I would say tbat it would not be advisable. Dr. J. F. Brown: I am in agreement with the scheme. The question of the nurses is only a matter of care being taken. An Anonymous Medical Opinion: It is against all common sense. Dr. J. Dreadon: AVe should have an isolation hospital outside the city, but the present policy is such that there is not much chance of getting it. I think the proposed block will be a stop-gap pending the building of an outside establishment. Dr. E. Newton Drier: I do not see any objection to it. Dr. C J. A. Griffin: I am against it. Dr. R. Bedford indicated that he was against it. “ I think the question should be referred to the honorary staff and the B.M.A. Dr. J. W. Harper: If it can be administered separately, all right. If not, there would be danger of infection. An anonymous opinion: I think it is a mistake. Dr. R. Tracy Inglis: I have always been against it. With regard to the alternative use of the block, the hospital is far too scattered already. The suggestion that the block could be used for general purposes is almost absurd. Dr. A. E. Marsack: I am very much against it. I believe that the infectious diseases block should be some distance from the general building. Dr. John Robertson: I am not prepared to make a statement. Dr. C. Rowley: It ought to be away from the general hospital and away from a centre of population. Dr. G. Graham Russell: Should be miles away. There should be no connection whatever as there would always be a' danger of people wandering from one place to another. Dr. C. Swanston: I think it is wrong to build an infectious diseases ward there. An isolation ward would not be so bad. Dr. G. Bruton Sweet: As far as I am aware the honorary staff of the hospital are in favour of it. Dr. J. A. Watson: I do not think it is advisable that the block should be placed so near the main hospital. Dr. D. N. W. Murray: Courting trouble. I am heartily against the proposal.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/SUNAK19290821.2.8

Bibliographic details

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 747, 21 August 1929, Page 1

Word Count
778

DOCTORS NOT UNANIMOUS! Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 747, 21 August 1929, Page 1

DOCTORS NOT UNANIMOUS! Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 747, 21 August 1929, Page 1

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert