Emergency Services => Medical => Topic started by: kyn on January 02, 2012, 13:00:42

Title: Military Families Hospital Brompton
Post by: kyn on January 02, 2012, 13:00:42
P.U.S. was asked at the Estimates Committee yesterday, whether it would not be possible to close town the hospital for women and children at Chatham and send patients either to a special ward in the Naval Hospital or to civil hospitals.
If it was decided to make use of the civil hospitals, should we have to pay retaining fees and the cost of the patients and, if so, would there still be an economy with the cost of the present hospital.
Will you let us know as soon as you can what answer can be sent to the Estimates Committee.
The next meeting of the Committee is on Monday, the 21st.

15/6/26.
Title: Re: Military Families Hospital Brompton
Post by: Leofwine on January 02, 2012, 13:12:16
I guess closing it was not considered economic as I know a couple of people (including at least one member of the KHF) who were born there in the 1950s. I'm not sure exactly when it did close but I know the medical centre in Maxwell Road which was associated with it closed c.1966. I assume the families hospital closed about the same time, but stand to be corrected.

The Military Families Hospital shown on a 1932 Map
(http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4067/5079398690_c081ddc0ba_z.jpg)
Title: Re: Military Families Hospital Brompton
Post by: kyn on January 02, 2012, 13:47:22
Thanks for that Leofwine.  There are a few documents I am adding over time, they may give us some idea of its closure date, although they are pretty early documents. 
The next in the folder:

Families of soldiers are already afforded certain outpatient treatment at the Naval Hospital, Chatham, and boys are sometimes admitted as in-patients.  In regards female patients it is unlikely that the admiralty would be prepared to provide a separate ward for our cases as they do not provide treatment and accommodation for their own.
Although Military Families Hospitals are established for the families of soldiers, Hospital treatment at the expense of Army funds is a privilege.  If the Families Hospital at Chatham is abolished we could not, in accordance with the Regulations, agree that the families should be admitted indiscriminately to Civil hospital.  The Regulations provide that families on the married quarters roll may be admitted to civil hospital only if exceptional circumstances obtain (e.g. if hospital treatment is necessary on urgent medical grounds).  Families not on the married quarters roll are not eligible for admission to Civil hospital except in cases of infectious disease where danger to the troops is involved, but in any case infectious cases are not dealt with in the Militaries Families Hospitals.
It is extremely unlikely that retaining fees would be asked by Civil hospital authorities if we are to use their hospitals to any extent.  Retaining fees are usually only wanted in the case of small pox hospitals.  It is not possible to say whether by sending patients to civil hospital any economy would result, as this would depend on all sorts of factors, the number of sick who would be  sent to the Civil hospital, the civil hospital’s charges, the extent to which closing of the hospital would in practice be reflected in a reduction of R.A.M.C. establishments and so on.
Title: Re: Military Families Hospital Brompton
Post by: Leofwine on January 02, 2012, 15:08:08
Thanks kyn, I will await your other posts and see what turns up. In the meantime I will conduct another thing on mt 'to do' list for Brompton and see what I can dig out about the founding of the hospital. I know the Ordnance Hospital next door (shown as Upper Kitchener Barracks on the 1932 map) was built in 1809 and that the Families hospital opened some time after this as the Females Hospital, later changing name to the Garrison Families Hospital.

I have a little more information on this somewhere, not sure if I have already posted it on another thread though.

PS Is your second post from the follow up committee meeting mentioned in the first one?
Title: Re: Military Families Hospital Brompton
Post by: kyn on January 02, 2012, 15:38:04
The next few will be replies to the original proposal sent out for peoples opinions.  I haven't looked at the whole file so I don't know what else is in there, or how long the file goes on for. 
Title: Re: Military Families Hospital Brompton
Post by: Leofwine on January 02, 2012, 15:43:41
Courtesy of one of bromptonboy's posts (http://www.kenthistoryforum.co.uk/index.php?topic=4783.msg42074#msg42074):

From the Building News 24 October 1862. Chatham - It is said that the authorities at the War Department have entered into a contract with Mr Stamp, the Government contractor, for the erection of a hospital at Chatham, for the reception of the sick wives and children of the troops of the garrison.

So that would suggest a building date in the early to mid 1860s.  This ties in with the 1866 OS Town planning map, which was surveyed in 1863. This shows the Garrison Hospital (aka Artillery or Ordnance Hospital) in situ, but the Families Hospital is absent.  Other maps indicate the names used for the hospital at various dates.

1863/6 OS Town Planning Map (not present):
(http://i821.photobucket.com/albums/zz137/Lossow/GarisonHospital1866.jpg)

1879 OS WD Map (as Female Hospital):
(http://i821.photobucket.com/albums/zz137/Lossow/GarrisonHospital1879OSmap.jpg)

1907 OS Map (as Military Families Hospital):
(http://i821.photobucket.com/albums/zz137/Lossow/Brompton1907.jpg)

1955 OS Map (as Military Families Hospital):
(http://i821.photobucket.com/albums/zz137/Lossow/GarrisonHospital1955.jpg)

Only fairly preliminary stuff so far, but suggesting a date of building in the 1860s as the Female Hospital, but had become the Families Hospital by the early 20th century, and was in use until at least the mid 1950s.

As a footnote, the First World War flying ace Major James McCudden was born in this hospital.
Title: Re: Military Families Hospital Brompton
Post by: bromptonboy on January 03, 2012, 15:56:05
To help with dates I was born in the Military Families Hospital on 24th September 1957. I do not think it was long after that time that it closed. The Ordnance Hospital shown on the 1863 OS plan was removed to the vacated Army Medical School premises at Fort Pitt and the ward blocks converted into soldiers barrack blocks. The hospital block facing onto the Military (later Maxwell) Road remained in use for military medical purposes until about 1967 when the establishment was transferred to a new Medical Block inside the modernised Brompton Barracks.
Title: Re: Military Families Hospital Brompton
Post by: Leofwine on January 04, 2012, 12:44:34
I have this photo of the Medical Center on Maxwell Road taken in 1966, is this the hostpital block you refer to bromptonboy?

Photograph reproduced by permission of the Royal Engineers Museum www.re-museum.co.uk
(http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5255/5453556886_37f082609c_z.jpg)
Title: Re: Military Families Hospital Brompton
Post by: bromptonboy on January 04, 2012, 14:48:44
That is the Ordnance Hospital block that was retained for medical purposes after the rest of the hospital was converted to barracks.
Title: Re: Military Families Hospital Brompton
Post by: kyn on January 04, 2012, 18:13:34
I do not read the recommendation of the Select committee to mean that the hospital for soldiers’ families should be abolished, but only that is should be absorbed in the Naval hospital, as was the case with the Military hospital at Fort Pitt.
The Admiralty, however, say they are unable to absorb the Military families hospital.
In my opinion it would be very undesirable to abolish this hospital.  There are certain civil institutions in Chatham and Rochester for the medical care of women and children, but I feel that in practice we should have very little chance of obtaining admissions to those institutions.
The Families hospital at Chatham has been in existence for many years.  I strongly urge that it be retained.

R.W.
1st November 1926.



The Select Committee evidently considered that this Hospital was an extravagance and there is no doubt we could make a saving even after paying for accommodation in civil institutions for our entitled families.  The cost of the hospital is heavy for an average of only eight occupied beds and many of them must be accompanied by privileged users.

RRDA
2.11.26.
Title: Re: Military Families Hospital Brompton
Post by: kyn on January 06, 2012, 23:29:04
26A. appears to assume that there is some entitlement to free treatment at Army expense either in a Military or in a Civil Hospital in the case of these families.  This is not the case because apart from infectious cases, which are  sent into hospital in the public interest and not because the individuals are entitled to free treatment, the regulations allow families of soldiers on the married quarters roll as a privilege to be admitted free where there is a Military Families’ Hospital, if hospital treatment is necessary.  In practice, the regulations have been stretched and cases admitted where hospital treatment is not really necessary, but is desirable.
Where no Military Families’ Hospital exists, paragraph 523, Army Medical Service Regulations, allows families of soldiers on the married quarters roll to be sent to a civil hospital in “special circumstances”.  There has been much dispute as to what constitutes special circumstances, but I suggest that the widest interpretation would not admit cases where hospital treatment is not really necessary.
Further, in sending patients to civil hospital we always claim ratepayers’ privileges.  To make an agreement with a civil hospital to pay retaining fees or charges for patients admitted would be to abrogate our rights.  It is true that if we do not come to such an agreement, our patients will have to take their chance of accommodation being available, but this is what they have to do at other stations where there is no Military Families’ Hospital, and what other civilians have to do.
I think the letter to the command might enquire whether any difficulty is anticipated in families obtaining hospital treatment, where such treatment is really necessary, if the families’ Hospital is closed, on the lines of 28A.

Title: Re: Military Families Hospital Brompton
Post by: kyn on January 12, 2012, 16:50:42
Legally, 28.A. is no doubt a correct statement of the case, as where there is not families’ hospital the wives and children of soldiers on the married quarters roll may be sent to a civil hospital in “Special circumstances” only.
The garrison at Chatham has however enjoyed the full privilege of a families’ hospital for some 60 years, and if the hospital is now closed, and admission to a civil hospital allowed in “special circumstances” only, that privilege will be lost, and families at Chatham will be worse off than now.
Very few maternity cases come within the meaning of the term “special circumstances”.
My interpretation of minute 22 is that you do not wish the families at Chatham to be worse off than they have been during the past 60 years, and that we should, therefore, investigate the possibility of obtaining similar treatment for them (including maternity cases) to that they now receive in the Military families Hospital.
Title: Re: Military Families Hospital Brompton
Post by: kyn on January 14, 2012, 20:22:23
1.   You permitted D.G.A.M.S. and myself to discuss with you the question of Military Families’ Hospitals, concerning which there is urgent need of a more definite policy than at present exists.
As the result of our conversation I submit the following as the basis of a general policy:-
(i)   No Military Families’ Hospital at present in existence should be abolished unless arrangements can be made for its amalgamation with another Military Families’ Hospital.
(ii)   The existence establishments of beds in each of the existing Families’ Hospitals shall not be exceeded.
(iii)   Admission to Military Families Hospitals need not be confined to the wives or families of soldiers on the official married quarters roll, but may be extended to families of serving soldiers on the married allowance roll, or married “off the strength”.
(iv)   The priority of admission shall be decided by the medical authority on the spot, and should normally be given to the most urgent case irrespective of whether the invalid is on the married strength of off the strength.
2.   If this policy is adopted it would retain the Military Families’ Hospital at Chatham which has been in existence now for over 60 years.

17th December, 1926.

Title: Re: Military Families Hospital Brompton
Post by: kyn on February 12, 2012, 17:12:16
S.of.S.
May I refer you to minutes 35 and 36 in this file.
D.G.A.M.S. has personally examined the problem very carefully, more particularly the feasinility of treating patients  from Chatham, Shoeburyness t Wool elsewhere: e.g. those at Chatham going to Shorncliffe.

Chatham is 40 miles from Shorncliffe.
Wool is 40 miles from Tidworth.
Shoeburyness is 50 miles from Colchester.

Amalgamation is impractical without depriving one or other of the garrisons of its existing facilities for hospital treatment.
We feel, therefore, that in common humanity, quite apart from the bad effect the closing of any of these family hospitals would have on the married soldier, we cannot recommend to you that is should be carried out.
Even the little hospital at Netley is essential for sick women from Transports.
I still fell, as I recorded in minute 20, that the Select Committee never intended that the Families Hospital at Chatham should be abolished, but only that it might with advantage be amalgamated with the Naval Hospital at that place.  As the Admiralty are not prepared to undertake this liability, I do most earnestly urge that the families Hospital be retained under the War Office.

RW
A.G.
Title: Re: Military Families Hospital Brompton
Post by: kyn on February 15, 2012, 20:13:04
I think that before this paper goes to S. Of S. you might like to see it, as former G.O.C.-in-C. Eastern Command.
It is true, as your predecessor said that the Select Committee on Estimates did not in terms propose the abolition of the Military Families’ Hospital at Chatham, but the difficulty is how I before the Committee this year, and S. of S. in the House, are to justify the expenditure of some £3,000 a year on a hospital, only 8 of the beds in which are occupies on the average and those to deal with cases where there is no strict entitlement but only a privilege, although a privilege of some 60 years’ standing.  It is only the insistent pressure for economy that causes these cases to be investigated.
If more money were available the ideal would be, of course, to have these Families’ Hospitals in all stations where there was no possibility of recourse being had to the local civilian hospital, but U feel sure that in the case of Chatham and perhaps in some of the other stations we shall be pressed to take such advantage as we can of the local facilities and save the money on staff at present ear-marked for the maintenance of small hospitals.

H.G.C.
Title: Re: Military Families Hospital Brompton
Post by: kyn on February 18, 2012, 12:51:31
S. of S. (through A.G.).
Certain general considerations arise out of your decision, and, as we have to report to the Treasury regarding the Chatham Hospital, it would be convenient to put the whole question to them.  May I have your instructions on the points marked A. B. C. D. and E.?
The policy as regards the provision of Military Families Hospitals has hitherto been to establish them only at station where the garrison was out of proportion to the civilian population and civilian facilities were not, therefore, available for soldiers families, or else at stations where there were no civilian facilities at all.  Thus a Military families Hospital has never been established in London, and a proposal to start one was negative by the Council two years ago.
Only families of soldiers on the Married Quarters Roll are entitled to admission to Military Families Hospitals, and then only of treatment in hospital is necessary and accommodation is available.  No hospital stoppage is charged to families on the Married Quarters Roll.
Families of soldiers not on the Married Quarters Roll may be admitted to Military families Hospitals provided accommodation is available and provided that it is not required for families on the Married Quarters Roll.  A charge of 1s/- a day is made.
At stations where there is no Military families Hospital families on the Married Quarters Roll may be admitted to civil hospitals at the public expense in special circumstances, which is usually interpreted as meaning when hospital treatment is necessary; but we do not provide treatment in civil hospitals for families not on the Married Quarters roll.
You have now decided that the Military Families Hospital at Chatham is to remain and that, while no increase of establishment of beds is to be made, families not on the Married Quarters roll shall have an equal right of admission with families on the Married Quarters Roll, the determining factor being urgency.
A)   Is this decision intended to apply also to Shoeburyness and wool?  The decision in the case of Chatham is based on the non-availability of civil hospital accommodation there, and it has not yet been established that such accommodation is not available in the neighbourhood of Shoeburyness and wool.  Civilians from Wool go to the civil hospitals in Bournemouth or Dorchester.
Your decision will not increase the cost of the Families Hospital materially so long as the establishment of beds in not increased, but it will probably lead to increased expense because as it puts on an equal footing as regards hospital treatment the family not on the Married Quarters Roll and the family on the Married Quarters Roll (priority of admission being given on grounds of urgency) there is a danger that the family on the Married Quarters roll will find itself crowded out and that more families will in consequence have to be boarded out at the public expense in civil hospitals.
B)   Further, if families not on the Married Quarters Roll are placed on an equal footing with families on the Married Quarters Roll as regards admission to military families hospitals, they will probably sooner or later claim to be put on an equal footing as regards medical attendance, admission to civil hospital and dental treatment.  There is no logical ground for giving equal treatment as regards admission to a Military Families Hospital and refusing it as regards admission to civil hospital, medical attendance and dental treatment.
The occupation of the hospital at Chatham will not be increased by your decision, because families not on the Married Quarters Roll and already admitted to Families Hospitals provided that accommodation is available.  The treasury and the Estimates Committee will doubtless comment on the expenditure of £3,000 a year for the maintenance of an average of 8 occupied beds, but we will explain this in the sense of your minute.
C)   Your decision is also intended, I take it, to cover the case on 24/Southern/2500, on which file the wife of a civilian at Bovington Camp asks for the admission of her child to the Wool Military families Hospital.
D)   The families of civilian employees are non-entitled persons as regards admission to Military families Hospitals and, if it is decided to admit them, they should pay the full rate of stoppage laid down, vis. 10s/- for an adult?
The admission of civilians will fill up the vacant beds and will increase the danger of Married Quarters Roll families being crowded out and having to be admitted to civil hospitals at the public expense.  Further, there may be difficulty in collecting from civilians the amount due from them in respect of their treatment in our hospitals.  They will expect to be treated as they would be by a civil hospital, i.e., pay nothing or as little as they can.  At present civilian employees may be admitted to military hospitals under certain conditions.  If their wives and children are admitted without any condition except availability of accommodation, it will mean that the families will be more favoured than the employees. 
E)   This is likely to create demand on the part of the employees for unconditional admission to military hospitals.  Are we to concede this?
Treasury sanction will be required for the admission of families of civilian employees to military families hospitals and also for the admission of families not on the Married Quarters roll on an equal footing (with priority in case of urgency) to families on the Roll, though we do not need their sanction for admission of families not on the Married Quarters Roll where accommodation is available.

H.G.C.
Title: Re: Military Families Hospital Brompton
Post by: kyn on February 20, 2012, 19:57:49
I am naturally very loath to curtail the privileges of soldiers’ families, and, if money were available, I would welcome an extension.  But, the financial situation being as it is, what is expended on privileges and concessions of the kind discussed in this paper can only be by the sacrifices of something which would make for the improved fighting efficiency of the Army.  And, in fact, there is an inevitable tendency to extend these concessions, e.g., on 14/Home/626 there is a proposal to extend the mile radius and on 2/Gen/1027 there is a demand for two nurses for the Families Hospitals at Woolwich and Colchester.
The cost of the Medical and Dental Services as showing in Appendix X of the Estimates is nearly £2, 500, 000; an analysis would show that no small proportion of this is due to expenditure on privileged services.
I ask myself whether we can afford this when the pressure to reduce is so insistent and we have such formidable commitments as mechanization, Imber, etc.  Even if the discontinuance of the privilege involves some hardship, to attempt to defend an expenditure of £3,000 on a8 beds will inspire our critics with the belief that our general administration is not as frugal as it undoubtedly is.
I see the difficulties in closing Chatham, Wool and Shoeburyness, but remembering that the families concerned if the husbands were civilians would be dealt with either in local institutions or by local nurses, I cannot but feel that some cheaper alternative could be found.  Are there not Queen’s Nurses in Chatham? Shoeburyness is near Southend which is now a large town.  Wool is within reach by ambulance of larger centres.
There may be some lowering of standards and perhaps some loss of comfort, but while I am in full sympathy with what A.G. says, I do not feel that this expenditure of public money is justifiable in present circumstances and regretfully come to the conclusion that these smaller hospitals must be closed.
I should like to be informed what alternative arrangements can be made.

10.6.1927
Title: Re: Military Families Hospital Brompton
Post by: kyn on February 21, 2012, 18:49:57
Sir,

With further reference to your letter of the 10th September, I am commanded by the Army Council to inform you that after very careful consideration they regret that they are unable to close the Military Families Hospital at Chatham.
This hospital was built for the reception of hospital cases arising among the families of soldiers at Chatham, Maidstone, Gravesend and Sheerness, and the Council are satisfied that the closing of the hospital would entail serious hardship to the families concerned.
The possibility of arranging for alternative accommodation to be provided in the Royal Naval Hospital at Chatham was considered in conjunction with the Admiralty but it was ascertained that no economy would be effected thereby as the annual cost to Naval Funds of making such a provision would be as heavy as the expenditure now incurred on maintain the Military Families Hospital.
As regards civil hospital accommodation there are three hospitals within responsible distance of Chatham and these were approached on the question of accepting military families.  Although the military cases dealt with at Chatham are comparatively few in number the civil hospitals are unable to guarantee the requisite accommodation and cannot provide any accommodation at all for maternity cases for which the Military Families hospital is largely used.
Consideration was also given to the amalgamation of the Chatham Military Families Hospital and the Shorncliffe Military Families Hospital but this suggestion was abandoned owing to the fact that the distance between the two stations is 40 miles and that from the medical point of view the transport of cases from the Chatham area to Shorncliffe, especially “lying in” women, cannot be undertaken.

The Secretary,
Treasury,
S.W.1
Title: Re: Military Families Hospital Brompton
Post by: kyn on February 25, 2012, 00:24:05
3rd October, 1927

Sir,
In reply to your letter of the 10th ultimo, I am commanded by the Army Council to inform you that Dover Military Hospital was closed on 21st May, 1927, and Canterbury Military Hospital on 7th instant.
The question of closing Chatham Military Families Hospital is still under consultation.
Title: Re: Military Families Hospital Brompton
Post by: kyn on February 25, 2012, 16:04:04
Proposal to Close the Military families’ Hospitals at

CHATHAMSHOEBURYNESSWOOL
Reason:£3000 too heavy expense for average of 8 occupied beds.Expense too great for small no. of patients.Expense not justified by small no. of patients & large staff.
Alternative proposals.1.  Amalgamation with Royal Naval Hospital, Chatham.1.  Admission to local Civil Hospital.1.  Admission to local Civil Hospitals
(i)  Bournemouth
(ii)  Dorchester
2.  Admission to Civil Hospitals in neighbourhood.2.  Amalgamation with Colchester.2.  Amalgamation with Tidworth.
3.  Amalgamation of MiL.F.H. with Shorncliffe M.F.H.3.  Medical attention in Married Quarters.3.  Amalgamation with Mil. Hosp. Wool with reduction of Staff of M.F.H.
4.  Medical Attention in Married Quarters.4.  Medical attention in Lodgings.4.  Medical attention in Married Quarters.
5.  Medical Attention in Lodgings 5.  Medical attention in Lodgings.
Results of Investigations.1.  Navy do not favour proposal, stating no expense wd. Be saved to the State.1.  (i) No arrangements can be made for local hosp. treatment of maternity cases.1.  (i) Bournemouth 20 miles away.
(ii)General cases with difficultly at Victoria Hosp. Southend at rate of 10/- per day.(ii) Dorchester 12 miles away.
2.  Great difficulty likely to be met with, for (i) no maternity cases accepted by any local civil hospital.2.  Colchester is 50 miles away.  Imposs. Medically.2.  Tidworth is 40 miles away. Imposs. From medical viewpoint.
(ii) General cases accepted only as and when beds available in two hospitals.
(iii) Civil patients might probably be given priority over military patients.
3.  Shorncliffe is 40 miles from Chatham.  Impossible from medical point of view.3.  Only 65% of those on Mar. Qrs. Roll can be accommodated in Mar. Qrs.  There fore large % of confinements among those on Mar. Qrs. Roll wd. have to take place in lodgings.3.  Might be further considered.
4.  Undesirable policy, tending to lead to increased demands for suitable annexes to be built to cope with the situation.4.  35% occupy lodgings, many with only 1 room.  Lodgings difficult to obtain.  Result as in previous col. No. 5.4.  As for Chatham & Shoeburyness.
5.  Undesirable policy – fraught with possible pecuniary hardships and discomfort to persons concerned. 5.  As for Chatham & Shoeburyness.

Title: Re: Military Families Hospital Brompton
Post by: kyn on February 26, 2012, 15:33:14
On the 8th January, 1927, Major-General P. G. Grant sent a letter with the table below, which shows “the present distribution of women and children at the stations served by the Military families Hospital, Chatham.”

Married Quarters Roll.Married Quarters Roll.Not Married Quarters Roll.Not Married Quarters Roll.Total.Total.
Station.Women.Children.Women.Children.Women.Children.
Chatham279412207312486724
Maidstone16292-1829
Sheerness234812163564
?. A. F.1128--1128
Gravesend4993565499


Title: Re: Military Families Hospital Brompton
Post by: Leofwine on February 26, 2012, 15:39:13
Is the ? in your last post 'R' - perhaps the R.A.F. on Sheppey or West Malling, made use of it? (I don't know if the R.A.F. were at  Gravesend or Rochester in 1927, but possibly those too?)
Title: Re: Military Families Hospital Brompton
Post by: kyn on February 26, 2012, 16:39:23
It could be, the part of the page was folded over and I didn't notice when I photographed it!
Title: Re: Military Families Hospital Brompton
Post by: kyn on February 27, 2012, 18:43:37
INFORMATION REGARDING MILITARY FAMILIES HOSPITALS.
GREAT BRITAIN.

Command and HospitalApprox. Date of OpeningNo. of beds equipped 1926Average No. of beds occupied 1926Military staffCivilian StaffPresence of absence of Civil Hospls. in neighbourhoodRemarks
Aldershot Command.
*Louise Margaret1895-9655472 Officers (1 part time)5 WardmaidsNo
1 Matron
2 Kitchenmaids
X 12 Sisters & Staff Nurses1 Cook
1 Serjeant2 Laundresses
1 Private4 Nurses Servant
Eastern Command.
Chatham18641581 Officer1 CookYes
4 Sisters & Staff Nurses2 Wardmaids
1 Serjeant1 Laundress
2 Nurses Servant
+Colchester186820121 Officer3 WardmaidsYes
6 Sisters & Staff Nurses1 Laundress
1 Private2 Nurses Servant
Shoeburyness? 1904721 Officer (also i/c Mil. Hosp.)1 CookNone nearer than SouthendThere has been a families Hospital since 1889.  The present hospital s a “gift” building – gunners officers.
3 Sisters & Staff Nurses2 Wardmaids
1 Serjeant (A reduction of 1 Serjeant being made in Estimates for 1927.1 Nurses Servant
1 Private
*Shorncliffe190922151 Officer1 CookNone nearer than Folkestone
7 Sisters & Staff Nurses3 Wardmaids
1 Serjeant1 Laundress
3 Nurses Servants
Woolwich186430231 Officer1 CookYes
7 Sisters & Staff Nurses3 Wardmaids
1 Serjeant1 Laundress
3 Nurses Servants
Northern Command.
Catterick19201031 Officer part time1 CookNo
3 Sisters & Staff Nurses1 Wardmaid
1 Nurses Servant
Southern Command.
Devonport186620121 Officer1 CookYesHope to train 1 Private for C.M.B.
6 Sisters & Staff Nurses2 wardmaids
1 Serjeant1 Laundress (P.T.)
1 Private1 Kitchenmaid
2 Nurses Servants
◊ Hilsea1875 (at Portsmouth)20131 Officer1 CookYesHope to train 1 Private for C.M.B.
6 Sisters & Staff Nurses2 Wardmaids
1 Serjeant1 Laundress
1 Private1 Kitchenmaid
2 Nurses Servants
Netley1862641 Officer part time1 CookNo
2 sisters & staff Nurses1 Wardmaid
1 Private1 Nurses Servant
Tidworth190524151 Officer1 CookNo
6 Sisters & staff Nurses4 Wardmaids
1 Serjeant2 Nurses Servants
1 Private
Ø Wool1920831 Officer (also M.O. i/c troops)1 CookNo
3 Sisters & Staff Nurses1 Wardmaid
1 Private1 Nurses Servant

The duties of O. i/c M.F. Hospitals are not usually confined to that alone byt embrace additional duties.
* At these stations hospitals existed for many years prior to the date shown above.
+  Hospital was closed in 1908 and Patients treated in Essex County Hospital, pending provision of a new hospital.  Re-opened 1922.
◊  Closed at Portsmouth and re-opened at Hilsea 1923.
Ø  Closed at Wareham and re-opened at Wool 1924.
X  Includes 4 Officers Wing.
Title: Re: Military Families Hospital Brompton
Post by: kyn on February 29, 2012, 10:30:12
St. Bartholomew’s Hospital,
Rochester.

17th November, 1926

Dear Sir,
With reference to your letter of the 11th instant, regarding the question of Hospital treatment for patents from amongst the Military Married Families stationed in Chatham, I have been requested by the Committee of this Hospital to state that although we are prepared to continue receiving such cases as we are now doing, the Committee regret that owing to insufficient accommodation and the great need for additional beds, for which purpose an Appeal for £80,000 is being made, they are unable to enter into any definite agreement with your authorities for the treatment required.

I am, Dear Sir,
Yours faithfully,

Secretary



West Kent general Hospital
Maidstone.
6th December, 1926
Dear Sir,

Further to your letter of the 12th ult., I have to inform you that my Committee of Management at their last meeting discussed the question of the treatment of Women and Children form your depot, and the following is a summery of the resolutions agreed to, viz:-

(a)   General cases.
The hospital is willing to undertake the treatment of patients under this heading at the same capitation grant paid in respect of Pensioners, i.e. nine shillings per day, towards the cost of maintenance.  It must be understood, however, that the patients would be answerable to the ordinary terms of admission, no beds being specially allocated, or priority of admission being given.
(b)   Maternity Cases.
These cases do not come within the scope of the Hospital.

Yours faithfully,

Edward Gregg
House Governor & secretary.
Title: Re: Military Families Hospital Brompton
Post by: Leofwine on February 29, 2012, 13:31:23
Some more plans of the Hospital (all reproduced by permission of the Royal Engineers Museum www.re-museum.co.uk)

1868 - Women's Hospital (Note: At this date the building beside the Garrison Chapel and School is the Schoolmaster's Residence)
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7203/6940957183_5fb1df29f8_z.jpg)

(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7194/6940957553_8e9f335082_z.jpg)

1907 - Female's Hospital (Note: At this date the building beside the Garrison Church had been Married Quarters but is now M.O.'s Quarters. Also, the M.O.'s office has been added below the main building.)
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7182/6940959519_771e3b89ee_z.jpg)

(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7188/6794845992_1a7fc5f797_z.jpg)

1940 - Military Families' Hospital (Note: At this date the building beside the Garrison Church is the Nursing Sisters' Quarters and the M.O.'s office is now the Dispensary)
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7186/6940958791_1e902fdb3c_z.jpg)
Title: Re: Military Families Hospital Brompton
Post by: kyn on March 02, 2012, 11:30:53
Gravesend Hospital
Kent.

November 23rd, 1926.

Dear Sir,

With reference to our recent interview re treatment, at this Hospital, of families of Service men in the Gravesend area, I am directed by my Committee to say they are quite prepared to take in serious and acute cases arising from such, provided our Medical Staff first agree as to suitability of all cases; that we have a vacant bed, and, upon entering our Wards, the patients are solely under the charge of our Medical Officers.
It being understood that the Military authorities will reimburse all out-of-pocket expenses, based upon the average cost per week, per patient, which at present stands at £3. 0. 4½.

C. E. Chapman
Secretary



Gravesend Hospital
Kent.

December 10th, 1926.

Dear Sir,

Further to my letter of the 23rd ult., I beg to inform you that the arrangement referred to, with regard to the treatment of families of Service men in the Gravesend area, does not include Midwifery patients.

C. E. Chapman
Secretary

Title: Re: Military Families Hospital Brompton
Post by: kyn on March 03, 2012, 15:14:50
Detailed Account of Military Families Hospital, Chatham, 1924/25.

In – Patients

Items of Cost.Amount.Remarks.
Patients.£.  S.  d. 
Provisions.200.  16.  2.
Surgical Supplies. 50.  14.  4.
Laundry. 37.  1.  9.
Rental.145.  0.  0.
Repairs.102.  18.  11.
Rate. 48.  6.  8.
Fuel, Light, water.246.  9.  0.
Barrack Services, (2) Hiring and replacement 82.  11.  1.Valuation of furniture - £1,091.  2.  4.
, (3) Washing, et.   4.  8.  8.
Personnel.
Officers.368.  7.  6.
Nurses.953.  6.  2.
Other ranks.276.  1.  0.
Civilians.351.  5.  6.
Administration.
Travelling  4.  18.  0.
Carriage. 69.  17.  8.
Postage. 13.  5.  11.
Stationary.  4.  18.  9.
Total.£2960.  7.  1.
Credits
Sums receivable.
Stoppages.162.  19,  0,


Detailed Account of Military Families Hospital, Chatham, 1924/25.

Out – Patients

Items of Cost.Amount.Remarks.
Patients.£.  S.  d. 
Surgical Supplies. 42.  4.  9.
Laundry.  3.  9.  8.
Rental.  14.  0.  0.
Repairs.  9.  6.  10.
Rate.  4.  13.  4.
Fuel, Light, water. 13.  1.  0.
Barrack Services, (2) Hiring and replacement charges.   7.  7.  7.Valuation of furniture - £99.  3.  10.
, (3) Washing, et.    .  9.  6.
Personnel.
Officers. 73.  6.  0.
Other ranks.180.  4.  0.
Civilians. 35.  18.  3.
Administration.
Postage.  1.  0.  4.
Stationary.  4.  6.  10.
Total.£389.  8.  1.

Title: Re: Military Families Hospital Brompton
Post by: kyn on March 04, 2012, 14:21:15
Further letters just re-hash what has already been discussed and none contained a final decision whether to keep the hospital open or not.
Title: Re: Military Families Hospital Brompton
Post by: Leofwine on March 04, 2012, 14:27:12
Well, we know they did decide to keep it open until the 1960s - I'm still trying to get the date for the final closure, but I think it was somewhere between 1964-66.
Title: Re: Military Families Hospital Brompton
Post by: kyn on March 04, 2012, 14:47:37
I was hoping one of the letters would state that it was being kept open and the reasons why.  All they said really was that it cost as much to keep it open as it would to pay for the patients to be treated elsewhere.
Title: Re: Military Families Hospital Brompton
Post by: Leofwine on June 30, 2017, 18:36:32
Chatham News - Saturday 12 September 1863

THE NEW HOSPITAL FOR SOLDIERS' WIVES.- The hospital recently erected at this garrison, by Mr. A. Stump, the Government contractor, of Brompton, for the reception of the sick wives of the military stationed here, has now been completed for some time, and was taken over by the Government authorities about two months back; but from some unexplained cause has not yet been brought into use.  There is doubtless some good reason for this apparent tardiness, but it is sincerely to be hoped that the opening of this establishment, which is calculated to be such a substantial boon to the class for whom it is intended, will not be delayed, even for one day, beyond the time actually required for completing the necessary arrangements.