In our early days, there was a very, very, strong and influential group on the Committee of Management, subsequently called the Committee of Governance, but it depends on who wields the influence. In media terms, Bernard, back in my early days at The Herald, you always had the President of the Committee of Management or the Medical Director, with the backing of the President, or the Professor with the backing of Lady Latham and the President of the Hospital. It was a very concerted effort to get things done and move ahead.

The Ethics Committee is sort of an aside which is a necessity, but it shouldn't be a hindrance. I can remember one particular case, if we’re talking about parent contact and holistic treatment, and experimentation or research, I can remember being deeply involved with a particular cardiac surgeon, Roger Mee, who’s still working in America.[83] A baby had been diagnosed in early pregnancy with an ectopic heart. I remember Roger coming in to my office one day and I think the pregnancy was about six or seven months down the track, and he said, I’ve got a case at the Women’s [Hospital], I think you should come up and talk to the parents. I think I can do something for them.

So up I went and he told me what he proposed to do. I was then asked, what would happen if it became public. I went through it, chapter and verse, with the parents about radio, press, television, the paparazzi, if it was successful, or, particularly, if it wasn't.

The baby, whose name was Daniel, was born at the Children's by caesarean section and whizzed into the operating theatre where there were intensivists and cardiologists. After about 12 hours of surgery, the baby went to intensive care. I was in constant contact with the parents, as was Roger. At day 5, when the baby was doing well, we decided to blow the whistle and invite the media. The parents were totally involved. I don’t know if it ever went to the Ethics Committee.

Day 6 little Daniel got a temperature and developed an infection, and finally succumbed on about Day 11. We had kept in touch with the parents all the way through and I asked them if they wanted to go ahead with the agreement to run a press conference. And they said, yes, we want to do that.

We called a press conference for the Sunday morning and every skerrick of the media was there. Just before we started, Daniel's Dad called me and said, "We’re going to come in but we don’t want any questions". I let the media know and then Dad decided to sit in on the press conference. The doctors told the story and then, right at the end, Dad said, I want to say a word. "I came in to make sure you got this story right. When we were told that our little boy had this problem, we were referred to Mr Mee. He gave us a 1% chance of survival after surgery. We agreed to go ahead with it. When the baby was born, we had a 3% chance of survival and by day 5, a 70% chance. I want you to get that right. It was not experimentation; we were given the opportunity to give our little boy life and we did so. And get that right."

That was total involvement of everybody. And I doubt whether, had that case gone to the Ethics Committee, it would have got that far. But there may have been a chance for that little boy Daniel to have been alive today.

Witness to the History of Australian Medicine