View report page

32
If we take into consideration the number of children
under 15 years of age in Finchley (6,642 at the census of 1901
and now estimated at about 8,620), and the frequent opportunities
for the introduction of epidemic disease from London
and elsewhere, it is not surprising to find that an outbreak of
one or other form of infectious disease is of fairly frequent
occurrence. But on comparing the epidemic mortality of
Finchley for various years with that of other districts round
London, or with that of England and Wales generally, the
incidence of epidemic disease in the District appears to be
below the average.
The past year has been one of exceptional freedom from
any severe epidemic in Finchley, and much as one might wish
such a state of things to continue for a lengthy period, it would
be contrary to all experience. One should, however, recognise
the fact that, although it may be impossible to entirely banish
infectious disease in spite of every reasonable precaution, we
can at least minimise the opportunities for infection, and ought
especially to do so in the case of young children. For at the
earlier ages children are, generally speaking, far more liable
to infection, and if disease attacks them, the effects are usually
more serious.
In view of these facts are we fully justified in permitting
infants to attend the public elementary schools? It is true
that if the children were not at school many of them would be
playing together in the streets, but I do not believe under
such circumstances the opportunities for infection are so
frequent as under ordinary school conditions. If it is held
that the greater weight of advantage is on the side of early
school attendance, then we must be prepared for troubles
similar to those of the past, though I hope with increasing
vigilance on the part of all concerned and the prompt exclusion
of cases of suspected illness, school closure will not be so
frequently called for.