Report of the Departmental Committee appointed by the Lord President of the Council to consider the working of the Midwives Act, 1902.
- Great Britain. Midwives Act Committee.
- Date:
- [1909]
Licence: In copyright
Credit: Report of the Departmental Committee appointed by the Lord President of the Council to consider the working of the Midwives Act, 1902. Source: Wellcome Collection.
Provider: This material has been provided by London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine Library & Archives Service. The original may be consulted at London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine Library & Archives Service.
305/336
![19 May 1909.] Mr. E. P. Young. [Contimied. encouragement has been given to poor law institutions as centres for training ?—No. 6934. But encouragement is given now, you think ? —Yes. 6935. You think there has been a material change in the attitude of the Central Midwives Board in refer- ence to that, do you ?—Yes. 1 have been to several instittitions. I generally visit them. 6936. And there is no lack of encouragement now ? ■—No. I do not think so. We have taken in almost as many as we can that have applied. The witness 6937. We have heard that a cei-tain number of people have formed an opinion as to youi- attitude in early days, and people have hesitated to repeat appUcations when once refused ?—Yes, that is right I think. 6938. But there is nothing in the present attitude of the Central Midwives Board at all hostile to the utilisation to the fullest possible degree of poor law institutions, is there ?—There are one or two members who ax-e against poor law institutions, but the document that I handed in shows the good work that poor law institutions have done, withdrew. Mr. John Theodoee Dodd called and examined. 6939. (Chairman.) I intend to confine myself to only a few points in the precis with which you have been good'enough to supply us. No doubt it is full of very interesting matter, but in my judgment a very large part of it is not germane, or at any rate not directly germane, to the points we have to elicit in our exami- nation of witnesses. You are a barrister of Lincoln's Inn ?—Yes. 6940. And a gi-aduate of Christ Church. Oxford ?— Yes. 6941. For a considerable number of years you have • been a member of the Oxford city council ?—Yes. 6942. And you have been on the council's Midwives Act committee since its formation ?—Yes. 6943. That committee has, I presume, special opportunities of forming an opinion upon the working of the Act ?—Yes. . 6944. Yovi had taken an interest in these subjects anterior to that, had you not ?—Yes. 6945. In your precis you say, the Committee will have before them evidence showing that, in a very large number of cases, women of the poorer classes have no skilled attendance at their confinements, and the lamentable results occasioned thereby. What makes you think that ?—Because it is the fact that they have no skilled attendance at confinement, and also it is so stated in various docximents to which the committee no doubt have access. 6946. But when jov. say no skilled attendance, what do you mean ?—I mean not attended by a skilled midwife. 6947. But on the contrary, so far as our information goes, a very large proportion of women have skilled attendance in the sense of a certified midwife's attend- ance ?—Or a doctor ? 6948. Yes.—A lai-ge proportion have not. 6949. You can justify that statement, can you ?—I think so. 6950. Because it is inconsistent with what we have heard in the coiu-se of this inquiry.—Of course a great many poor people have such attendance, but certainly large numbers have not. 6951. When you say a very large number of cases, I presume you mean a majority of cases ? —No. 6952. What number of cases, then?—I could not tell you exactly. 6953. Then you are using language to which it is very difficult to give any definite significance, when you say a very large number of cases without being able to tell us what proportion of cases you mean by a very large number; because our evidence goes to show that the number of cases of confinements not attended by a doctor or a skilled midwife is very small. What is your experience in Oxford that makes you say that ?—Certainly there are many there who are not so attended, and I also say this from what I have read on the subject. 6954. But it is not safe to believe all jow read without verifying it ?—No. 6955. Upon what is your opinion based that people cannot pay for this skilled assistance; for a certified midwife does not, as a rule, charge a high fee ?—She charges a good deal moi-e than some. I can give you some figures as to that, I think. The sort of fee the unskilled women, or Gamps, charge I can give, speaking of uncertified women, not midwives at all, but the G-amps. 6956. But that is rather outside the scope of our inquiry? — By an unskilled woman, I mean the uncertified woman. The fees they take vary from 5.S. or 7s. 6d. to occasionally as low as 4s. 6d. or'Ss. 6d., and occasionally up to 10s. 6957. But surely there are very few people among the working classes who are not able to pay 5s. oi- 7s. 6d. ?—A good many cannot pay that, probably. 6958. But that is the normal fee, as we understand it, in i-ural districts, of what for the purpose of your argument we will call skilled attendance; that is. the attendance of the certified midwife ?—But the ordina^ry fee for the uncertified midwife is 5s. or so, as I sav. 6959. But our evidence goes to show that the certified midwife's services, at any rate in the rural districts, can be obtained for 5s. or 7s. 6d.; sometimes it is as much as 10s. ?—No doubt. 6960. Surely there is nothing in the condition of the average working people to make them \mable to pay it ?—Yes, I think the certified one gets more than the iincertified one undoubtedly, and that often she does not do the same amount of work in the house, or washing of things. 6961. _ But a woman who foresees for 7 or 8 months that she is likely to be confined on a given date approxi- mately can provide, or her husband on her confinement can provide, 7s. 6d. for the midwife ?—I do not think so, because the wages are so low. The wages are not really enough for the maintenance of the family. 6962. When you say so low, they are very much better than they used to be ?—Yes, very much better than they used to be, but lately they have been extremely low. 6963. But do you mean to say that a man with 16s. a week cannot provide 5s. to pay a midwife's fee by paying so much a week ?—I should doubt very much if he could. They have not enough for the support of themselves and their families in proper comfort, that is according to Rowntree's figures. 6964. I know of no figures to prove that .P Rowntree puts the minimum expenditure necessary to provide properly for the necessities of a family of two adults and tkree childi-en at 21s. 8d. a week. 6965. It depends on the scale of living, does it not ? —That is for a man and wife and three children. It is the minimum to keep him in health and efiiciency. 6966. But that depends upon economic considera- tions in diiierent places?—He is taking York, and that is very much the same as Oxford or any of these towns. 6967. I am not sure that any general conclusione can ever be based on such data ?—But then take the investigation which was made recently into wages. The conclusion come to was that a great many men were receiving wages not adequate for them to bring up their families on. Therefore what really happens is that people have not enough for the sustenance of their wives and families ; and if you tiy to put an extra burden upon them, as this Act does, by compelling them to have a skilled midwife and pay extra fees, that will mean so much out of the money available for their food, and all sorts of evasions of the Act will result. 6968. But your argument rests upon the assumption that the skilled midwife will charge more ?—I think in every case a certified midwife must be paid more money r I](https://iiif.wellcomecollection.org/image/b21361113_0307.jp2/full/800%2C/0/default.jpg)
