View report page

24
The words which we have printed in italics in the foregoing quotation are
those which give rise to controversy; but it appears to us that the view of
the Clerk to the Board is right, and that the words admit of no other
interpretation than that, wherever a place is situated whence a patient is
admitted to a hospital, the notification certificate must be sent to the
medical officer of that place, and not to the medical officer of the district
in which the hospital stands.
In cases where a patient developes an infectious disease within a short
time after admission to hospital, it may reasonably be assumed that the
disease was contracted before admission, and obviously, in the interest of
public health, the notification of the case should be made, as the Act
directs, to the Medical Officer of Health of the district in which the patient
had been previously resident. But the utility of such a notification is not
so apparent in cases where the patient has been resident in the hospital for
a considerable time.
In either case undoubtedly it is desirable that the Medical Officer of
Health of the district within which the hospital is situate should be made
aware of any outbreak of infectious disease therein. But in our view this
is met, as suggested by the Clerk to the Board in his letter to the Medical
Officer of Hammersmith, by section 55 (1) (a) which provides that where
an inmate of any house within the district of a sanitary authority is suffering
from an infectious disease " the head of the family to which such inmate
(in this section referred to as the patient), belongs, and in his default the
nearest relatives of the patient present in the house or being in attendance
on the patient, and in default of such relatives, every person in charge of or
in attendance on the patient, and in default of any such person, the master of
the house, shall, as soon as he becomes aware that the patient is suffering
from an infectious disease to which this section applies, send notice thereof
to the Medical Officer of Health of the district.
The Managers will observe that the Act requires two things—a certificate
from a medical practitioner, and notice from the head of the family or other
persons, as mentioned in the sub-section last quoted.
In the case of an inmate of a hospital who came to that hospital from a
distance the ordinary notification certificate must, it seems to us, be sent to
the medical officer of that district; but it seems to us that the local medical
officer is entitled, not to a notification certificate, but to "notice" under
sub-section (a) above quoted on the occurrence of any case of infectious
disease; and although there is no provision for paying for this " notice," it
seems to us that it would answer all the purposes which the Vestry of
Hammersmith and, we understand, others have in view.
We accordingly recommend—
(a) That a copy of this report be forwarded to the Hammersmith
Vestry in reply to their letters of the 3rd and 7th December last.