TO: Mavor & Council Aupust l7th, 1973
FROM: Alderman P.A. deyer, re

GVRD Obstetric-Neonatal & Gynaccological

Services Report -— cont'd.

obstetric-neonatal units as one means of improvement. We support the objective
of improved quality, but we must walk before ve can run. We believe that the
reporting committee, confronted with the recently authorized (by referendum)
Coquitlam Hospital, includes standard obstetric and neonatal facilities and
also desiring to establish a major specialized facility for obstetric and
neonatal care in the New Westminster area, but perhaps believing that they
could not have both in the next decade, chose in favour of the specialized
facility. We assert they chose wrongly, at odds, in fact, with their own
observations about the developing higher need areas in the Lower Mainland. We
believe that "patient and doctor convenience’, and in fact increased willingness
to "go to" and "use" hospital facilities ~ with inherent positive effects on
general community health levels - are closely related to "localness"., We are
also not ashamed of “community pride", a commodity we would point out, which
was heavily traded on in the recent successful hospital referendum. To con-
struct a highly specialized facility in New Westminater at the expense of a
more general facility in our area where none presently exists would be to plan

not for people, but before people. An obstetric~neonatal facility in the

Coquitlam Hospital is needed now ~ and is part of what the people thought they

were voting for last December.

Would you please circulate this submission to all GVRD Board members,
as our representative will be raising ic shortly. We would also point out that
we are supported in our position by the Simon Fraser Union Board of Health
which has representation from Port Coquitlam, Port Moody, the District of
Coquitlam, and New Westminster. I would request that this submission be also

submitted to Coquitlam and Port Moody for endorsation.

Alderman P.A. Meyer,
Chairman, Wealth & Welfare Commitres.