View report page

184
treatment of casuals must be at the expense of—and to the
detriment of—children requiring and prepared to have conservative
treatment.
Of the 9,659 children subjected to routine dental inspection
in schools during 1934, 6,989 (72 per cent.) were found to
require treatment. Of the 6,989 who were offered treatment,
3,228 (46 per cent.) accepted. In individual schools there is
wide variation in the acceptance rate. For instance, in
Kirkdale Road School the acceptance rate was as high as
68.6 per cent., whereas in Downsell it was as low as 35.8 per
cent.
In 1,122 cases (16 per cent.) the parents actually refused
treatment, while in 2,708 cases (38 per cent.) the parents took
no notice whatever of the offers of treatment made on behalf
of their children.
This means that, of the school children inspected by the
dental surgeons during the year, the inspection was a waste
of time in 54 per cent. of the cases examined as the parents
failed to avail themselves of the treatment offered. Unfortunately,
these are the parents who attend at a later date
for urgent treatment (casual) for relief of toothache and
extraction of teeth which might have been saved by acceptance
of treatment when offered. Of 8,437 attendances for treatment
in 1934, some 2,063 were by " casuals."
As long as casual treatment is given by the Authority, so
long will parents feel more or less justified in failing to accept
treatment when offered. If, however, they are given to
understand that their failure to accept treatment when offered
will render their children ineligible for urgent casual treatment
at a later date, parents will undoubtedly begin to appreciate
the real purpose and value of the school dental scheme.
I suggest, therefore, that the Education Authority should
decline to afford casual dental treatment to parents who have
failed—on two consecutive occasions—to take advantage of
the conservative treatment recommended.
After consideration of that report your Education Committee
agreed with the suggestions made by the School Medical Officer
with regard to the restriction of facilities.