UK-WORKHOUSE-HOSP-L Archives

From: <>
Subject: Re: New List - New Boy
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 09:01:39 EST

In a message dated 24/03/00 11:21:34 GMT Standard Time,
writes:

<< Who in Institutions actually
instigated registration of a death. >>

Hi Bob,
As you do not refer to a time period it's difficult to provide a definitive
answer. Therefore: During the earliest known periods relating to workhouses
the Master and Matron held great sway over the inmates and the medical
services provided for their care, if any. Inmate patients were often
'allowed' to die, simply because they were dying anyway! The official
regulations from 1830 onwards specifically stated that the workhouse master
'take care that no pauper approaching death shall be left unattended, either
during the day or night,' often this humane rule was broken or interpreted to
mean that, instead of being left alone to die in peace, they were placed in a
crowded ward, frightened and in sufferance without out food or water. Once
dead the body would be laid out in full view of the other incumbents.
Workhouse masters, who were required to pay a doctors expenses to administer
care, often refused access to the 'patient.' 'What was the point when they
were going to die anyway?'
Certainly, by 1910, medical practitioners did certify death, by cause, of
workhouse hospital inmates. Notification to the medical practitioner would
have been by the Master or, in his absence, the Matron.
It is important to understand that not all people in a workhouse hospital at
the time of death were in fact actual inmates. Many poor people were admitted
a union workhouse hospital for no other reason than they could not afford to
pay for medical treatment in hospitals requiring payment for their services.

Hope this goes someway in answering your question.

Tony. (co-list owner).

This thread:

• New List - New Boy by "The Rudd Family" <>

  • Re: New List - New Boy by <>