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

View report page

Wood Green 1956

[Report of the Medical Officer of Health for Wood Green]

This page requires JavaScript

Not one death occurred during 1956 as a result of childbirth.
Indeed, only three deaths have resulted from this cause
over the past ten years, during which time, 6, 496 Wood Green births
have been recorded. Unfortunately, maternal mortality figures are
not available for 1906. although we know only too well that
puerperal sepsis and other causes took a heavy toll of women during
and after child-birth at and about that time. Five mothers
died as a result of child-birth in 1931. The reasons behind this
spectacular improvement in maternal mortality are very much the
same as those which apply to the saving of infant lives, particularly
the great advances in midwifery, ante-natal care, and the
introduction of antibiotics.
The birth rate in 1956 was 11 5 per thousand population, as
compared with 11.7 in 1955.Five hundred and seventy-eight births
were recorded during the year. In 1906, 1,232 births were registered,
corresponding to a birth rate of 26 78 per thousand population.
In 1931, 719 live births were registered, the birth rate
being 13.2. These figures will speak for themselves. We know that
the birth rate has been steadily declining in this country over
the past years, more especially during the post-war era. Whether,
in view of existing overcrowding and the housing situation, we
should take any active and immediate steps to check this decline
remains an extremely difficult question.
In no sphere has there been a greater change than in the
field of infectious diseases The basic control of infectious
diseases has not materially altered, although we have naturally
adapted our outlook to changing conditions Thus, in 1906 it was
thought that the removal of cases of infectious diseases to an
isolation hospital would materially reduce the case rate and would,
therefore, benefit the population as a whole. This, of course,
explains why these hospitals were originally termed "isolation"
hospitals. This premise has now been exploded. We know that only
a small proportion of cases of infectious disease, apart from
grave infectious diseases such as smallpox and poliomyelitis,
require hospitalisation, and then only for such reasons as inadequate
accommodation, the serious nature of the illness and the
fact that the mother goes out to work We also know that terminal
disinfection, i.e. the disinfection of rooms, clothing, etc.,
after an infectious illness or when a case has been removed to
hospital has nothing like the value once ascribed to it Lastly,
the phenomenal advances recorded in the field of immunisation, in
any one of its many forms, has to be considered
None the less, the control of infectious diseases still rests
on the adequate supervision of cases, contacts and carriers,
satisfactory housing, personal hygiene, and the strict observance
of general measures of public health In other words, prevention
is invariably and indisputably better than cure
Apart from our changing attitude to the control of infectious
diseases as infectious diseases, we must take into careful
account the great changes which have taken place in the character
and incidence of many such diseases
6