Institution death

[Orlaith17]

I'm curious about some recent findings. Two relatives died in institutions of different sorts. One was in a poorhouse, one in a hospital asylum. The one who died in the poorhouse had her death notified by her husband (he was not in the poorhouse). The other who died in the asylum had her death notified by an attendant. But was a widow, but she still had living relatives. Her brother (my grandad) was alive, as was her own daughter who was 30 years old. So why would an asylum attendant notify her death to the registrar? Shouldn't it be a relative who did that?

[Russell]

Hii
Having worked for years in a mental hospital (only a few years previously it was called an asylum !) it was usual for an attendant to notify a death. After all we had a Doctor on hand to notify a death and for many of us on the staff we knew the patient better often than the relatives. Some folk were admitted to hospital and more or less abandoned by their family. We rarely had an up to date address for the next of kin and it could take days or even weeks to find them. Scots law requires an early notification of a death. We couldn't wait

Obviously this did not apply to all patients. Some families were dedicated to the well-being of their relative and rarely missed a visiting time but they were a minority.
Mental hospitals were rather peculiar, insular, self-contained communities. Sometimes surrounded by high walls and staff were often the nearest thing to family that some patients might have.
Hope this explains a little.

Russell

[Alcluith]

Russell,

We had a member of the family killed in Larbet and yet no one was prosecuted. He was a regular vistor to our family home in the late sixties early seventies, with a view to his release but it was decided he was to long institutionalized to be a viable candidate for release, it was only shortly after that he was killed yet our family were never notified. It was only through our recent genealogical research that we found out about his death.

regards

Alcluith

[Russell]

Hi Alcluith
I obviously cannot comment on specific circumstances but I was always horrified by the idea that long term institutional care could not be reversed enabling the person to return to society (That was one of the reasons I left psychiatry and moved into orthopaedic nursing then nurse teaching where I could teach up-to-date thinking and have an influence on the directions we were taking.) The next health service initiative which decanted a mass of totally unprepared inmates into an equally unprepared society shocked me utterly. We now have folk with severe psychiatric illnesses struggling with medication, homelessness, societal indifference with virtually no support mechanisms in place.
I almost preferred the massive institutions for all their flaws. In common with any large work force there were some undesirables mixed in and tragedies could happen but, in the main, staff were caring and did their best especially in the days (pre 1950's) before any form of effective psychiatric medication had been discovered.

Russell

[Alcluith]

Russell,

Like you I will not comment on what happened but I was totally unhappy that his death was not treated better.
He was not able to come to terms with being in the "outside" world. the sad truth, as far as I know was that it was his mother who was taken into the asylum after the death of her husband, her children , two boys and a girl were also taken into the asylum because the immediate family would not take them in, they all died there despite our families attempt, in the 70s, to get them out, but they had been two long in that institution.
My grandmother who was their aunt and a widow with 9 children of her own was just was not in the position to take them and pleaded with her brother to take them in, it caused a big family split that was never healed. Their immediate family were quite "well to do" but wanted nothing to do with their brother's family. As far as I know the children had nothing wrong with them.

Alcluith

[Orlaith17]

Thank you to both Russell and Alcluith. Thought provoking posts from both of you. It was in 1937 my relative died, and her cause of death was listed as Acute Gastritis (8 days) Hypertetic Pneumonia (4 days) so nothing suspicious about it. I know her daughter did maintain contact with other relatives (my uncles) but have no idea why the lady was admitted to the asylum in the first place, when she was admitted, or if her daughter maintained contact. I doubt if any paperwork from that period would be in existence now? I do understand where you are coming from, Russell, as I worked in this same place as a student in the 1970's. I spent my holidays working there, but with no idea I'd had a relative there some 40 years before. There were indeed many patients there who had no visitors, and as far as staff knew, no contactable relatives. People had come there years before for many reasons, some tragic ones. I am a Scot and understand that deaths need to be notified within a certain time scale. I just had it in my head that a living relative would do this following notification from the hospital/asylum of the death. That said, I honestly do not know for sure if living relatives had maintained regular contact. Would a relative have had to give permission for her to be admitted there? Or could a doctor have made that decision? Or could she have admitted herself without telling any living relatives? I have to stress this is simply an interest in history in general, and with no issues. I am also researching things in military history because of genealogical discoveries. Institutions are just another branch of the tree as it were.

[Russell]

Hi Orlaith

Although I have been away from nursing for nearly twenty years it still distresses me to see the disastrous results of pigheaded erroneous political decisions which affected large numbers of folk who were dumped years ago into large, impersonal institutions which were asked/told to accept ever increasing numbers of vulnerable people that society found unacceptable

Would a relative have had to give permission for her to be admitted there? Or could a doctor have made that decision? Or could she have admitted herself without telling any living relatives?

How they ended up in hospital could be any of the above. Medical admissions could result from police referrals too although all too many people were victims of the court system and were banged up in gaols when they should have been receiving psychiatric care.
Prior to the Mental Health Act 1959 there were inmates who were labelled 'promiscuous', disowned by their parents and committed to the asylum on the request of their parent. ( I don't think the mother had much say in the matter )
Patients were classified as 'voluntary' or 'certified' but even those admitted voluntarily would find it difficult to re-emerge into society if the DOCTOR (a V.I.P. back then) decided that they should stay in hospital. Prisoners had rights and freedoms that somehow were lost to those labelled mentally ill.
After I retired I worked for a charity providing residential care to many of those unfortunates who were not able to live independently in society after they were chucked out of the hospitals that they closed to save money. It could take years to help them recover the skills they needed to begin to enjoy a reasonable standard of life. It was so satisfying to see them develop those skills.
Politicians and Accountants Grrrrhhh

Russell