London's Pulse: Medical Officer of Health reports 1848-1972

View report page

Chiswick 1925

[Report of the Medical Officer of Health for Chiswick]

This page requires JavaScript

89
"From past records and knowledge of the families,
it can be said with certainty that in 90 per cent. of cases
(d) it is simply indifference which prevents the cards
being signed and returned. Were the modicum of
required interest and energy forthcoming, the percentage
of real refusals would not amount to more than 12 per
cent. With a view to eliminating this paralysing factor,
the following procedure was adopted in a few suitable
cases during the year.
"All children are examined and offered treatment
once every year. Refusals are notified that their names
are removed from the treatment list for the remainder of
the year. In cases where a parent, having previously
persistently ignored all notices, attends a Clinic with a
child suffering from the result of this neglect and
demands immediate treatment, the particulars are
first submitted to the Education Committee. The consequent
delay and publicity have proved excellent
methods of emphasizing the importance of the yearly
notices. Five such cases were reported to the Education
Committee during the year. This procedure is probably
responsible for the encouraging fact that whereas in a
School examined in April and May the percentage of
"ignored cards" was 60 per cent., that of a School
examined in December was 35 per cent.
"One hundred and eighty-three sessions were devoted
to treatment. 1,546 children were treated. This number
does not include patients referred from the Maternity and
Child Welfare Centres, the average attendance per session
was 13.1, an increase of two per cent. over last year. In view
of the fact that in spite of working at a high speed and overtime,
there was a waiting list of over 500 at the end of the
year, and that the number of refusals was again decreasing,
it was considered necessary to apply to the Committee for
an extra session per week to be devoted to treatment.

Table II.

Referred Cases —1925.

(a)Consent Cards signed47.0%
(b)Private treatment or other valid reason for non-treatment at Clinic1.0%
(c)Definite written or verbal refusals.5%
(d)Cards ignored51.5%