Two families claim patient in photo

Two families are both claiming that an elderly man controversially pictured using a toilet is their relative, says a lawyer.

The row over the photograph yesterday took what lawyer Patrick Mulligan accepted was a bizarre turn, with the two families both sure that the man was their family member.

The picture of the semi-naked man, seated in a toileting chair over a toilet, is part of a photo essay in the latest issue of Kai Tiaki Nursing, the journal of the Nurses Organisation. The journal intended it to support the union's campaign for increased pay for caregivers, but the union says it was not formally part of the campaign.

The essay shows caregivers working with elderly people in resthomes - shaving and feeding them, and helping them in the shower and the toilet. Some of the resthome residents are naked or only partly clothed.

The photographer says all residents pictured gave their consent, except for one who had dementia, whose family gave permission.

Some union members are outraged by the pictures, but others are said to be supportive of the photo essay.

On Tuesday, Hamilton woman Josephine Whitehead, represented by Mr Mulligan, said the man on the toilet was her late father and her family was shocked by the picture.

Her father had dementia and could not have given consent, and the family had not been approached for consent, Mrs Whitehead said.

But yesterday Mr Mulligan said he had spoken to the family of another man, who the Nurses Organisation maintains is the one pictured, and they were equally unequivocal about his identity.

He said Mrs Whitehead and her family were still certain the picture was of their father, but they accepted that another family believed the picture was of someone else.

Both men have died since the photos were taken three to four years ago.

Union acting chief executive Cee Payne-Harker said the journal was correct about the pictured man's identity, and this had been backed up by a sworn statement from his daughter. The picture could not be of Mrs Whitehead's father, as it was taken in the resthome's hospital and he was not in the hospital at the time.

The union said the journal had full consent for publication from the family of the man pictured.

But Mr Mulligan said he had spoken to this family. While they confirmed they gave consent for the photo to be used, the recent publication years later had distressed them and they had not envisaged the pictures would be used as they had been.

Both families wanted the photo destroyed and not reproduced, he said, and all undistributed copies of the journal to be destroyed, or the article withdrawn.

Most of the over 30,000 copies have been distributed, but distribution of the rest is on hold. Cee Payne-Harker said she hoped "to get some resolution" with Mrs Whitehead's family before distribution resumed.