Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1904-06-07
REMOVAL OF THE DEAD
ALLEGED DELAY I'M SECURING
NECESSARY PERMITS.
Health Officers Response to Complaint
of an Undertaker--Dr. Hick-
nng's Report.

DR.. VIM. G. Woodward, District health
officer. today submitted to the Commission
ers a statement relative to the complaint
of Messrs. E. r. James & Company, un-
dertakers, alleging unnecessary difficulty in
securing the removal Of remains from the
Washington Asylum Hospital, and to the
report of DR.. D. Percy Hickling, visiting
physician Of the hospital. with reference to
the undertakers' complaint.
Mr.. James complained that he was oblig-
ed to make several trips from his estab-
| lishment to the hospital before receiving
the proper certificate permitting him to re-
move dead body from the institution. He
also de ,lared that undertakers generally
experience considerable delay in the re-
moval Of remains from the hospital. DR..
Hickling, in reply to the complaint, at
tributed the difficulty in this matter to the
lack Of authority on the part of the resident
physician Of the hospital to issue removal
permits.
In commenting on the circumstances as
set forth by Mr.. James. DR.. Woodward says
that they Indicate to his mind that the in
convenience of which Mr.. James COM
plains was due partly to faulty information
and instructions given to him by an officer
or officers connected with the Washington
Asylum Hospital and partly to the absence
of the visiting physician of the hospital
from that institution and from his private
office.
"It is not within the province of the
health department" says Dr. woodward,
ito say whether these conditions were or
were not due to negligence on the part of
the officer or officers involved in the oc-
currence or on the part OF the visiting
physician but the health department must
protest against having the responsibility
therefor attributed to It.
Different Proposition.
1.-THE extent to which Inconvenience may
be caused to undertakers generally by
existing law and practice with reference
to the removal of dead bodies presents
question quite distinct from that raised by
Mr.. James letter. To demonstrate that
such law and practice are in no way
responsible for the Inconvenience to which
Mr.. James was subjected 1t Is necessary
only to point out that 1t would nave Deen
avoided had the resident physician in the
first instance telephoned the desired data
to the visiting physician. and the visiting
physician thereupon issued the proper death
certificate. Mr.. James. by calling at the
residence of the visiting physician. could
have obtained the death certificate and, on
his way. to the Washington Asylum Hos
pital secured the necessary removal per-
NIT. The entire case would thus have been
disposed Of without delay or Inconvenience.
$50 far as relates to that portion of the
report of the visiting physician which
states that the resident physician of the
Washington Asylum Hospital is not under
the law authorized to sign death certif-
Gates, attention Is called to the fact that
his incapacity is due merely to the fact
that he is not legally qualified practi-
toner Of medicine in the District of Co
lumbia.
Desirable Qualification.
"If he were so qualiied-and the adyisa-.
bility Of requiring at least the resident
physician Of the institution, If not the Ju-
nior assistants, to be SO qualified is respect
fully submitted to the Commissioners-he
might lawfully sign the death certificates
for patients who die in the hospital. such
patients being practically under the Joint
professional care, as it we're, of the resident
and the visiting physicians"
DIR. Woodward states that the health de-
partment has drafted legislation necessary
to enable it lawfully to delegate its au-
! thority with respect to the issue of removal
! permits, which legislation Is now pending