I have just seen a paper by Sir John Hall, entitled “Observations on the Difficulties experienced by the Medical Department of the Army during the late War in Turkey.” In this somewhat singular document, which appears to be a defence of Sir John Hall’s own conduct, there are certain statements made about the female nursing establishment in the East which require a word of comment. It will be observed that throughout the paper, the weapon which Sir John Hall uses against all civil interference in repairing the sufferings which proceeded from the defects of his own department is simply detraction. As for Civil Commissions, they were useless, as for Civil Hospitals, they were costly, and their officers lived magnificently and were extravagantly paid. As for the nurses, they were benevolent, pious, well-intentioned persons, but what could they do? How could one woman nurse eighty sick? The medical men thought they could not. Why had Miss Nightingale stores of port wine placed at her disposal, which she could give to the French Hospitals, while he, the principal Medical Officer of the Army, had no such stores at his disposal? Sir John Hall must have already discovered that this old weapon is no longer of use in defending his position. It would have been more to the purpose had he produced his requisitions for food, clothing, comforts, &c., and shown how they were refused or not complied with. At the very time I gave over part of our own private stores of port wine, &c., to the French Hospitals (for part only of what was given were Government stores at all), Sir John Hall might have obtained, As to his statement about the Nurses, it simply shows ignorance of the whole matter. Nobody ever contemplated giving to a Nurse the entire charge of a number of sick in a Military General Hospital. It is no part of good Hospital nursing to do so. With proper Orderlies, a Nurse can very well attend to sixty or seventy sick. We were prevented, indeed, by the authorities, and by circumstances, from organizing a proper system of nursing, and were obliged to do all the good possible in the best possible way. But Sir John Hall’s method of estimating the efficiency of nursing, by dividing the number of sick by the number of Nurses, is simply absurd. Footnotes:
LONDON: PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL. |