Helpful Comment

Posted: July 4, 2008 in Dr. Alfred W. Pearson: Jack The Ripper
I received a request from a regular reader to allow a comment on my blog post regarding Dr. Pearson’s action as a medical attendant during Mr. Tait’s operation of a 14 year old patient on July 18, 1885. Here is that comment from Jason B., an ex-paramedic.
Comments (1)

First 20 commentsPrevious 20 commentsNext 20 commentsLast 20 comments

  • Jason B

    July 03 3:45 PM

    I am an ex-paramedic and I just wanted to state that Mrs. Trenouth is correct – a Medical Attendant is an Assistant Surgeon

Thank you Jason, and that is entirely correct. Mr. Lawson Tait was one of three Chief Surgeons at the Birmingham Women’s Hospital at that time, and would have performed many surgeries each and every day. He was merely listing the assistant surgeons assisting/observing the surgical procedure. The article in the British Medical Journal states that Pearson brought his patient to Mr. Tait’s private Hospital in Birmingham. Those surgeries that only list Tait’s initials are those patients that resided in Birmingham. They did not require an attendant. Once the assistant surgeon arrives at the hospital with their patient, they are required and duty bound to be present at their patient’s surgery and assist the Chief Surgeon when required so to do.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s