The Hawaiian star. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu]) 1893-1912, 1899-06-21

Health that Dr. howard having pre-
scribed for the case, should give the
certificate. Dr. Howard refused, be-
cause he found that the woman wanted
a certificate for a child, while he had
prescribed for an adult, aged forty-five.
The woman then stated that it was not
child, not a woman, but man who
had died, aged forty-five, and upon this
changed statement DIR. Howard issued
certificate, and the Board of Health
officials granted permit of burial. En-
quiry shows that a man was buried.
| Now, again in treating of this case,
The Star makes no charge of their be-
ing any thing wrong, but there certain
! ly might have been something seriously
wrong, had person been so disposed.
And we must remember the quotation
how oft the means to do i'll deeds maxi
es i'll deeds done" and carefully avoid
putting opportunities for crime before
a populace which may some day take
advantage of its opportunities. We can
however, in this case, assume that the
various episodes occurred from sheer
stupidity and lack of realization OF
/ Illt lSItSSltS loI lIulll
Taking the matter up from the COM
mencement. A woman goes to the dis
pensary to obtain medicine. She des-
cribes the symptoms as those from
which she herself is suffering, and the
Government doctor prescribes for her,
a woman of middle age. Later some one
dies. The woman says a child. The
! 70
child, but for an adult. Medicine such
as prescribed was too strong for a child.
How often does this kind of thing oc-
cur at the dispensary? Is it a common
thing for the physician to be deceived
in this manner, and to have symptoms
described to him, as those of a person
present before him, when they are the
symptoms of an entirely different per-
son. the party giving the description be-
/ ing in perfect health? Can medical
skill be frequently lead astray in this
way? Is it a common thing that doses
for an adult can be given to children?
! One must say that the value of the
public dispensary is problematic, If
medicine is scattered around in this
haphazard fashion. There has been
considerable complaint about the dis
pensary, but one knows under what diff
! ficulties a doctor works when dealing
with ignorant people, and large per-
centage of those who go to the dis
pensary are ignorant. Our population
is heterogeneous, polyglot in language.
Has the doctor at the dspensary the
proper means of communicating easily
with Hawaiians, Portuguese, Chinese
and Japanese? or how does he know
whether he is prescribing for the people
themselves or for other people.
We have no such thing as medical
inspector here, and each doctor in
charge of a public dispensary is very
much law unto himself. There is no
use in multiplying Offices but it does
seem as if an inspector might find a
good deal to look into if he were APP
pointed. He might find out upon what
general principles patients at the dis
pensary are prescribed for, and whether
PRESERVATION of others before the doctor
is frequently practiced. Certainly the
case cited may cause some surmize on
this point
Now to turn to the burial certificate.
1t was known at the Board of Health
that DR.. Howard refused his physi-
clans certificate, because the dead per-
son was described as a child 1t was
also known that he gave a certificate
when the applicant changed her story
and said it was not a child but an
adult Was not this story in itself suffi-
cient to rouse suspicion and show the
need of investigation? That the Board
of Health officials are striving to do
what is right one thoroughly believes,
and this certainly was a very peculiar
case, but the very fact of it's popularity
should have called for especial scru-
tiny.
There is one other point that needs
calculation. DR.. Howard refused the
certificate when the statement was
made that deceased was child. He
granted it when it was stated deceased
was an adult. Is it customary for physi-
clans to give certificates of death with
out seeing the corpse they are certify
ing to? From the hazy statements Of
the woman Kaleiaka, it was quite pos
sible to deduce that there were three
corpses or on another line of argument
that there was no corpse at all.
The lesson to be learned is what eX-
IRENE laxity there has been in the past,
and what necessity there is for vigilance
in the present and future. Certainly
the case under review reveals strange
possibilities.
WILL. AID CARL Il PROIECT