A DOCTOR’S CONDUCT.

Taranaki Daily News, 8 November 1922, Page 3

A DOCTOR’S CONDUCT.

SERIOUS CHARGES. It was recently stated in the cables that following the issue of a writ by Dr. Zlotkowski against Smith’s Weekly NeWs in July.’ claiming £20,000 damages for alleged libel contained ‘in published matter the Medical Board, after a protracted inquiry, issued a judgment condemning Dr. Zlotkowski’s conduct in a professional respect and directing that his name be removed from the Medical Register.

The charges against Dr. Zlotkowski arose out of a series of articles in Smith’s Weekly, in which it was alleged that he was guilty of ‘'infamous conduct” in a professional respect while acting as honorary physician of the outpatients’ department of Royal Alexandra Hospital for Children, and of the National Association for the Prevention and Cure of Consumption, and that he took advantage of his position to solicit parents and guardians to employ him in a private capacity, representing that the patients required his special private treatment, which they could not obtain in the hospitals or elsewhere. It was asserted that he assured a number of parents that there was no hope for their children apart from his treatment, and that he thus extracted large sums from working people who could ill afford to pay. A writ of lige] was issued against the paper, and the New South Wales Medical Board held an inquiry lasting for over a fortnight. At the opening of the inquiry counsel for Arthur Kench (Inspector of Health) said Dr. Zlotkowswi’s methods were to tell patients’ parents that the case was very serious, and that it would require special subsequent treatment. The doctor would ask how much the parent could give, and he would then hand over his card, with an address in Macquarie Street. He said, those things, said, counsel, in order to extract money. He said certain cases were tubercular, and that they would require his special serum. In one case £l6 16/ was paid for this serum, and in another £7 7/. If the evidence was believed, it was one of the grossest cases of the misuse of a doctor’s honorary position at a public hospital, and for the most sordid reasons possible. The ‘ evidence of twelve witnesses who had paid money to Dr. Zlotkowski under these conditions was given, also that of two of the staff of Smith’s Weekly, who stated that when they consulted Dr. Zlotkowski he informed them that they were tubercular, and required his serum treatment, whereas other doctors declared them to he absolutely sound. 'Dr. Zlotkowski, giving evidence on his 6 own behalf, said he had. been a qualified medical man for 26 years. He was honorary physician at the antitubercular dispensary at the Royal Prince Alfred Hospital and resident of the National Association for the prevention and cure of consumption, and he believed in the serum treatment, and had always practised it. While he was examining children at the hospital there was always a nurse present, and during the whole of the 16 years he was- there all his conversations with his patients could have been heard by anybody who might have been listening. His days at the hospital being Thursdays and Fridays, he used to give the blood test on the Tuesday, and, in order to get the best results, he used to have the patients sent up to bis rooms on Thursday mornings. The nurse used to give them his address, but he had never had cards printed. Dr. Zlotkowski swore that, through a long period of years, not on one single occasion had they ever been charged a fee, nor had a fee been suggested to them. With the exception of two, no cases had come to him through the dispensary as private cases. Of these two one had paid £7 1.2/ for 26 visits. Witness concluded by denying that he had ever used his position to solicit private patients -or had ever represented that he could give them treatment that they could not get at the hospital. Tn reply to Mr. Thomson, K.C. (for the complainant), witness- said he knew that it was wrong for an official connected with a hospital to make money, directly or indirectly, out of the institution. He had never made a complaint regarding people of means using the hospital. He did not see any harm in not informing the hospital authoritiesthat he was going to treat privately patients who had come to him there.