casualty 1909 tv programme

[jackybower]

Hi

Now that I've located two nurses connected somehow to my family, that tended soldiers during WW1, it has occurred to me to wonder about the way that nursing was carried out during that period.

I have seen the TV programme Casualty 1909 and would like to know if, in the opinions of the experts, this portrays nursing at that time in an accurate light. If portrayed accurately, (or as accurately as TV dramas can allow) this type of programme can give an insight into attitudes/dress/techniques available at the time, and help the understanding of the period in a way that books can't. However, if portrayed badly they can give people the wrong idea which can be infuriating to those people who know better!

Of course, nothing beats reading and studying as a means of obtaining the truth, but there are only so many areas we can each study at any one time. Well made dramas are often a good way of topping up one's knowledge in a non-specific way.

Jacky

[royalredcross]

Casualty 1909 was very much based upon the records of the London, which are extensive. The archive has a lot of detail on the period including much on Matron Luckes and the great fundraiser Sidney Holland, later Lord Knutsford. The uniforms used in the series were, I believe, copies of those which can be seen in the London's Museum. As TV programmes go, I would suspect that the surroundings were faily accurate even if some of the story lines were enhanced a little.

The Museum is well worth a visit and the archive has detail on those nurses who trained at the London.

Norman

[Sue Light]

I definitely second what Norman says. The London has great records, and I suspect that it's very accurate historically. However, The London Hospital was very different in it's attitude to nurse training from other places, and there was often criticism from both other hospitals and the nursing press. Whereas three years had become the accepted period for a full training, The London awarded hospital certificates to its nurses at the end of two years, although they were expected to stay at least three years, and preferably four. A large chunk of their training involved going out into the community as to fulfil private nursing duties, for which the hospital received considerable payments, while the nurses benefited not at all. So those episodes of Casualty (1901/1907/1909) which depict nurses sallying forth to private houses, were accurate for The London, but did not happen in other hospitals (or very few).

My only gripe with the programme is how wonderfully attractive all the women are, how composed and ironed they still look at the end of the day, and how little the blood disfigures their uniforms. And I have a feeling that Cherie Lunghi is Eva Luckes re-incarnated! I use the following image in my talks as an example of how nurses were represented in wartime, and I always smile as this nurse must surely be based on Casualty heroine Ethel Bennett. So if you were wondering what Ethel got up to in 1914/1915/1916:

Sue

[Terry_Reeves]

The man may be an officer, but to woo a woman whilst wearing spurs shows he was no gentleman. Hrummph!

TR

[Sue Light]

The man may be an officer, but to woo a woman whilst wearing spurs shows he was no gentleman. Hrummph!

But no, they had to be there, just to prevent the Forum member (or two) who would have been only too keen to point out that he was incorrectly dressed without them, and then berated the postcard manufacturers for inaccuracy.

Sue

[jackybower]

Well - who WOULDN'T fancy a man in uniform!!???

Thanks for your all your replies.

Jacky