Cook Hospital Inquiry

Taihape Daily Times, 18 January 1918, Page 5

Cook Hospital Inquiry

SOME SENSATIONAL EVIDENCE

GISBORNE, Jan 17

The Hospital inquiry was continued by the Royal Commission to-day. Dr Walter Reeve, a member of the honorary medical staff, stated that he acted as superintendent during the superintendent’s holiday. Witness reviewed the cases of unrest at the hospital, which he attributed to attempts to enforce discipline amoflg the staff after a long period of laxity; The ’ witness was questioned' by Mr Myers (counsel for the petitioners) regarding certain allegations against Dr. Bowie, the medical superintendent at the hospital. Referring to the case of Mrs White, who was operated upon in March, Mr Myers asked who performed the operation. Witness; “Bowie and I.”

‘‘Did anything happen in the first, operation which should not have done?”

Witness: “Yes, the bladder was opened Avhen perhaps it w T as not desirable.”

“Was it an accident?” —“Yes —one which often happens in highly-skilled hands. “That necessitated several operations?” —“Yes.”

“Do you remember, shortly after the operation, beings in charge of the hospital, and something being reported to you?”—“Yes. A Sister showed me a swab which had been removed from the body, from the passage. The dressing should not have fallen into the bladder. It might have remained in bladder but 'wound would not heal. It might have appeared, but a third operation might have been necessary. The presence of the dressing was the fault of the dresser who dressed tne wound.”

“So the presence of the "dressing in the 'wound was not due to any fault of Dr, Bowie?” —“Oh, no.” “Have you heard any statement from Dr. Bowie detrimental to Matron Tait?”—“Yes. He said she was lacking in tact, did not handle the nurses properly, and on one occasion he referred to her as suffering from delusions.

“Do you remember when he told you about her?” —“About a year ago.’ “Have you discussed it with him since?” —“No. I do not remember what the details were, but I know there was friction between the two head? of the institution at the ime.” “You have seen the Matron ovfer and over again?”—“Yes.” “Have you noticed any justification for any statements of her? —“No, certainly not.”

The Commissioner: “What was the impression Dr Bowie left in your mind when he said she was suffering from' delusions ?”—“Ordinarily, when that is said, we think they are rapidly qualifying for a mental hospital. That was the impression made in my mind.”

Mr Wauchop: “Which, of course, meant that she was more or less incapable of conducting her duties, and, of course, you would consider her a great danger? Did you take that meaning from what Dr. Bowie said — that she was in such a mental state that she could not carry "on her work?”—“Yes ”

“Was not this what Dr. Bowie said, that she was suffering from delusions of persecution by Drs. Collins and Scott, and that he was in league with the nurses? Is not that what he conveyed to you?”—He might have said something of that kind.”

“But I want you to remember, for it means a great deal to a medical man, and, of course, you want to see fair play to a brother-docftrfT’ —“He commenced by saying, T am something of a specialist in mental disease and I have been watching the Matron ever since she came to the institution, and she is suffering from delusions.’ ” “He referred to the delusions of persecution—was not that it?”—“No.” “Then the impression he left on you was that the Matron was mad?”— “That is rather a heavy definition. There are many degrees of mental defection.” ;

Mr Wauchop: “You remember your remark of the operation on Mrs White. If the nurse had done her duty, would the accident have happened to the bladder?”—The bladder had urine in it, and it was the nurse’s duty to empty it,” Other witnesses examined were Dr. Kahlenburg, and Dr. Wilson (ex-sup-erintendents at the hospital), and Mr G. W Humphreys, ex-chairman of the Board. The inquiry is developing slowly, the principal questions so far relating to the resignation, under pressure by the Matron, of Nurse Higgins, for insubordination, and her subsequent reinstatement and transfer after an inquiry by the departmental officers and the Minister, and the treatment of certain specific cases, including Mrs White, at the hospital. The inquiry may be continued to morrow.