prev next front |1 |2 |3 |4 |5 |6 |7 |8 |9 |10 |11 |12 |13 |14 |15 |16 |17 |18 |19 |20 |21 |22 |23 |24 |25 |26 |27 |review
The change from the Poor Law administration of hospitals in 1929-30, to local authority control was the first major change in this arrangement. Local authorities gave public health practitioners authority to manage and control these newly acquired facilities. Medical Officers of Health responded to this challenge in varying ways, many took this opportunity to improve services, while others took a more relaxed attitude.

The major drawback to this new responsibility for public health was that those involved became more concerned with the problems and minutiae of clinical/hospital administration, became medical superintendents and thus directed clinical care. This often gave rise to unease. Clinical consultants on the one hand, did not respect Medical Officers of Health whom they considered divorced from “real medicine”. MOHs on the other hand saw this as a means of acquiring power, authority and status. At the same time they were charged with, and developed, community services for pregnant women, infants, children and school health services, particularly in poor areas where the population could not afford to use GP services. Thus public health and general practice found themselves in competition and tensions resulted.