§ 64. Mr. CASSELasked the Secretary to the Treasury whether Hawkins, of St. Paul's Road, Camden Town, an insured person, was recommended for treatment for tuberculosis at home in November, 1912; that since then he has nothing but the doctor's services and cod-liver oil; that the accommodation is very bad and the doctor has made certain requirements, but no further notice has been taken of them than a mere acknowledgment; that consequently the patient is not making any progress; and whether he will take steps to see that this man receives the necessaries ordered by the doctor?
§ Mr. MASTERMANI am informed by the London Insurance Committee that the insured person in question was recommended for domiciliary treatment in November, and has since that time been receiving this treatment, including doctor's services and medicines. Arrangements have been made for the patient to receive other articles ancillary to his treatment.
§ Mr. CASSELIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that the doctor in charge of the case states that his requirements have not been supplied?
§ Mr. MASTERMANNo, I am not aware. I will make any further inquiries of the London Insurance Committee if the hon. and learned Gentleman desires me to do so.
§ 67. Mr. CASSELasked the Secretary to the Treasury whether, in the case of R. P. Darken, of 223, Clarence Buildings, N.W., entitled to sanatorium benefit and recommended for treatment at home, the clerk to the London Insurance Committee, at an interview which took place between him and the doctor in charge on 2nd January, 1913, informed the doctor that they would not pay for the necessaries ordered by him, such as bedding, supplementary diet, and visits by a nurse; that the local authority would have to pay for them or the man must go to the infirmary, and that the only things allowed for the treatment of such cases were the doctor's 1499 services, cod-liver oil, and extract of malt; that a similar statement was made over the telephone to Dr. Sykes, the medical officer of health for St. Pancras; that the doctor in charge attributes the death of his patient to this refusal; that certain articles were obtained from the dispensary in Oakley Square, N.W.; and that no repayment was made in respect of them until the day when a question relating to the matter appeared on the Order Paper of the House of Commons, when a special messenger was sent to the dispensary with a cheque for £10; and what steps he proposes to take to see that the necessaries prescribed by the doctor are supplied?
§ Mr. MASTERMANI am informed by the London Insurance Committee that the clerk to the committee informed the doctor that the committee had no power, and could not in future arrange to supply such articles as coal, but only such food and nourishment as were ancillary to the treatment of tuberculosis The committee are empowered to authorise the supply of articles which are ordered by the doctor and are ancillary to the treatment, hut have no legal power to supply articles not falling within this description. The answer to the second part of the question is in the negative. I may add that the patient did, in fact receive the articles ordered for him and there is no foundation therefore for the suggestion in the fourth part of the question. I am informed that repayment had been sanctioned, and a cheque actually drawn for signature before the hon. Member's previous question was put down on the 13th instant.
§ Mr. CASSELIs it to be taken as a rule when the doctor orders ancillary treatment in the case of tuberculosis that the things are not to be supplied?
§ Mr. MASTERMANNo, only the articles which can be legally supplied under the Act which rules the ancillary treatment of tuberculosis. The Act is not an Act for giving general relief to poor people.
§ Mr. CASSELIs it a fact that these articles are confined to cod liver oil and extract of malt?
§ Mr. MASTERMANOh, no; a cheque for a considerable sum, I think nearly £10, was paid over for other articles which were for ancillary treatment; but the insurance committee have no power to supply coal, or bread and meat.
§ Mr. CASSELIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that the information given by the doctor in charge of the case is that the articles he ordered were not coal, but supplementary diet, the daily visits of a nurse, and proper bedding?
§ Mr. MASTERMANThose were the articles supplied.
§ Mr. CASSELIs it not the case that these articles were only supplied after such delay as to cause grave and serious injury to the patient?
§ Mr. MASTERMANOh, no, I have answered that already; that is not so: I have the facts.