Difference between revisions of ".MjEwNg.Mjk3MTc"
(Created page with "[page 349] in my hall. If he was my patient in my hall, and abused him, I should take hold of him. If he belonged to him I should let him alone and let him fight his own battl...") |
HeatherMoran (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[page 349] | [page 349] | ||
| + | |||
in my hall. If he was my patient | in my hall. If he was my patient | ||
in my hall, and abused him, I should | in my hall, and abused him, I should | ||
| Line 13: | Line 14: | ||
certain attendants with whom you had an | certain attendants with whom you had an | ||
understanding that neither should report on | understanding that neither should report on | ||
| − | the other any of | + | the other any of their misdeeds? A. No, sir, |
no understanding particularly about it. | no understanding particularly about it. | ||
Q. Haven't you so stated that that was the | Q. Haven't you so stated that that was the | ||
Revision as of 18:05, 6 April 2022
[page 349]
in my hall. If he was my patient in my hall, and abused him, I should take hold of him. If he belonged to him I should let him alone and let him fight his own battles, perhaps. By Mr. Baker: Q. Did you decline to interfere in a case where you saw other attendants abusing a patient, for fear they would report you? A. No, sir. Q. Was it because it was a part of the agreement between each of you? did you have certain attendants with whom you had an understanding that neither should report on the other any of their misdeeds? A. No, sir, no understanding particularly about it. Q. Haven't you so stated that that was the understanding among you? A. It was the understanding of course; no particular talk about it; but if cause they didnt do it. Q. Then was it the understanding that if you saw misconduct on the part of another attendant you should not report it, and if he saw misconduct on your part he should not report it? A. That was the custom, but no talk made about it in that way that I know of.