Stephen Donnelly (Wicklow, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I thank the witnesses for attending. I convey particular thanks to the FACS Forum and to Ms Keely for giving voice to what the parents and children have been experiencing. It has been heard. My first question is for the forum. There is clearly a lot of co-operation between it, those who have been affected and the relevant agencies of the State. Do the forum members believe that the State bears any liability for what has happened? What services are they not getting? Do they have a sense of the kind of costs that are being incurred by families supporting children who have been affected?

For the HPRA, is it possible to establish a causal link in an individual case? There are shocking levels of causality that can be found through clinical testing but, on the basis of an individual case, is it possible to say that a particular boy or girl has physical or neurological issues that can be causally linked to the drug?

I ask the HPRA and the HSE why there have been so few diagnoses. If approximately one tenth of the estimated number has been diagnosed, why is that figure so low? I ask the HSE what the response has been to the requests that have been laid before the committee this morning from the FACS Forum. It has requested that there be a study on the number of children, an investigation into how this happened in the first place, and that the services required be provided. As Deputy O'Reilly said, the parents and children are not looking for a slice of a finite pie. Is there a package that has been put in place?

Is there any estimate of the cost to the State of providing the required services or the cost per family or child? Mr. McGrane mentioned children not reaching full potential as a result of neurological development delay. Does that mean the child will reach his or her full intellectual capacity but take longer to do so, or that the child or adult will have a permanent intellectual issue?

I have a question for the representatives from either the HPRA or the HSE. Mr. McGrane stated that it is now uncommon for the drug to be prescribed to pregnant women. Given the evidence before us that 30% to 40% of children whose mothers used the drug during pregnancy have serious issues, is there a clinical reason why it is still prescribed to some pregnant woman? If its use is uncommon among pregnant women, some are being prescribed it. Is there an overriding clinical reason that makes the risk worthwhile in those cases or has its usage by such women not been eradicated because not all prescribers are fully aware of the dangers?