View report page

42
German measles, but in general the requirement was later withdrawn
and it was understood that only those authorities who
were in a position to demonstrate that they were undertaking
special measures which were dependent on the disease remaining
notifiable should retain the provision. The inclusion of this
disease amongst those to be made statutorily notifiable was considered
at the time the clauses in the now Public Health Act, 1936,
relating to the notification of infectious diseases were under consideration,
but it was decided not to include it. While many
reasons can be adduced for making this or that disease notifiable,
in general it can be said that to justify its requiring such action
the disease should be one of public health importance, either
from the standpoint of the number of deaths caused, or because
of the disability suffered by the patients; or it should be one
which can be effectively combated by public health measures, or
one for which prophylactic or therapeutic agents exist. The
fact that the disease is notifiable may heighten the respect with
which the complaint is held by the public, and to that extent
assist in the educative efforts of the staff of health departments to
instil into the minds of the public a full appreciation of the seriousness
of the ailment, more particularly in those of tender years.
The disease, however, is notifiable only by the attending medical
practitioners and not by the parent—not that many notifications
would in fact be received if the obligation were actually laid on
the parent. Whatever advantage to the patient might accrue
from the notification as a result of any measures taken by the
staff of the public health department, these are the less likely to
be required by those patients whose illness has been notified, as
the mere fact of notification connotes that there is a medical
practitioner already in attendance, whereas, on the other hand,
it is just those patients who might be considered to be most in
need of whatever help can be given by the public health department,
who are not brought to the notice of the department, just
because a medical man is not called in to them. For this reason,
then, it is questionable whether the benefits derived from making
the disease notifiable are any the greater than those which follow
on the position which obtains by which the head teachers of the
public elementary schools send to the medical officer of health
the names of those children who are absent from school, being
either sufferers or contacts of cases of infection, including measles.
Where the numbers from the two sources of information, namely
the doctors' notifications and the head teachers' lists, do not overlap,
the information which is the more valuable to the public
health department as measured by the help that the department
can give, is that contained in the head teachers' lists, these being
the affected children who are not under the care of the medical
practitioners, though, of course, to be of real advantage, the information
must be received promptly. On occasion, particulars