asked the Minister for Health whether he has received a complaint from a person (name supplied) residing at Ballincollig, County Cork, relating to the non-attendance of a dispensary medical officer; and if he will state (a) the date of the complaint, (b) the date of the departmental reply and (c) what action has been taken in the matter.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Medical Attendance: Cork Complaints.
I received a complaint from a person resident in Ballincollig in a letter dated 2nd December, 1957. The letter was acknowledged on the 4th December and, on the 9th December, the South Cork Board of Public Assistance were asked to furnish observations on the matter. The local authority's report was received in my Department on the 24th January, 1958. Following consideration of this report, the question was investigated by a medical inspector of my Department at the office of the local authority during a visit to Cork early in February. Arising out of his report a further letter issued to the local authority on the 6th March and their reply was received in my Department on the 21st March.
Examination of the complaint is proceeding.
asked the Minister for Health whether he has received a complaint from the Cork County Council regarding the treatment of a post-polio patient (name supplied) from Crosshaven, County Cork; and if he will state (a) the date of such complaint, (b) the date of the departmental reply and (c) what action has been taken to investigate the case.
On the 25th November, 1957, the county council transmitted to me a copy of correspondence relating to the treatment of a post-polio patient at the City Hall, Cork. The county council stated that the County Health Services Committee were not satisfied with the terms of the city manager's letter concerning the matter, which was enclosed, and adopted a resolution asking that the correspondence be submitted to me for investigation. The letter was acknowledged on the 26th November. The matter was referred to a medical inspector of my Department for investigation. The medical inspector communicated with the Cork County Medical Officer and on the 2nd January last the county medical officer stated that the patient had resumed his course of treatment on the 9th October, 1957, and up to early December when he entered hospital he had received three courses of treatment per week.
I have examined the correspondence regarding this matter. I find that it was investigated fully by the county medical officer and by the city manager. The county medical officer was satisfied that the physiotherapist was doing her best under considerable difficulties and that the trouble arose out of the refusal of the parent of the patient to obey instructions. The city manager shared this view.
I accept the views of the county medical officer and the city manager and, in view of the fact that the patient subsequently resumed his course of treatment, I do not consider that there is any further action that I need take in the matter.
May I ask the Minister is it the county medical officer or the city medical officer who made the report?
It was neither, but as I have pointed out the county council transmitted to me a letter stating that the County Health Medical Services Committee were not satisfied with the terms of the city manager's letter and that the matter was investigated fully by the county medical officer and by the city manager.
In view of the fact that the Minister has considered reports from all concerned, including the parent, is he satisfied that because of some unfortunate dispute between the official concerned and the parent of the child, the child was left for four or five months without any treatment and that, furthermore, the parent was informed by the official concerned that no treatment would be given to this post-polio case until such time as the parent would have apologised in regard to the argument that took place between the mother of the child and the official? Is the Minister satisfied that in such a case, where any dispute between a parent of a child and an official arises, the child must be made the victim of such argument between officials?
There was not argument between officials in this matter. What happened was this. The parent, in disregard of the regulations, forced her way into the treatment room and remained there. Not merely that, but she was the cause of a certain amount of dislocation and inconvenience to the other patients who were being treated. The physiotherapist in this particular case had a very difficult job; she had been dealing with conditions which existed consequent upon the epidemic of poliomyelitis which was experienced in Cork in 1956. If parents are not prepared to conform to the regulations they are primarily responsible for any inconvenience to which they are put.
Is the Minister aware that the official concerned gave an assurance to the county medical officer in the month of June that notwithstanding whatever argument might have taken place between the mother and this official the child was to recommence treatment and that treatment would again be given and that that treatment had not been given up to the month of August? Is the Minister also aware that the county medical officer had to admit, unfortunately, that it was because of the deciding view of the official of Cork Corporation, who apparently had full responsibility in refusing, over this argument with the mother, to give treatment, that the whole matter has arisen?
If the mother had been so concerned about the child she could have complied with the regulations. Instead she wrote a letter which was, in my opinion, defamatory of the physiotherapist. I have said before and I went to repeat that parents must obey these regulations, and if they do not the whole system will collapse.
Are the officials supposed to obey the regulations at all? With the permission of the Ceann Comhairle I should like to raise this matter on the Adjournment.
I shall communicate with the Deputy in the course of the evening.