Sorca Clarke (Longford-Westmeath, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I am really disappointed that we have to have this meeting. I suspect it will be the first of a series of meetings we will have on issues like this. I find that deplorable. People entrusted CHI with the care of their children. Children are not small adults. They have a very specific set of needs. I say this as a TD and a parent, I think CHI abused that. Not only are the parents stressed and anxious, as Ms Nugent referenced in her opening statement, they are furious and this was not acknowledged anywhere in her opening statement. I wish CHI luck rebuilding trust. I have children who have been to CHI hospitals. They no longer need to but I am not sure if that trust would ever be rebuilt with me if I was in the same situation as these parents.

My first question is about clinical review meetings while my second is about the retrospective review. The hip dysplasia advocacy group is saying very clearly that many of the families with children were included in the audit from 2021 to 2023 and have gone back for the review meetings. A further investigation was mentioned to them. They were under the impression that the clinical review would be the last step - the closure step. Can Ms Nugent provide clarity as to what additional steps are planned and how those steps differ from the initial process?

Who will be on the panel conducting the independent international review? What is the purpose of a second stage and how does that benefit the children and their families? As part of that, are different thresholds being used there as opposed to the initial stage of the audit?

Very concerningly, I am told that the clinical lead was unable to answer a question as to whether children, regardless of the surgical justification, face long-term risks due to the modified surgeries they underwent. The families are asking very reasonably for clear evidence-based answers. Very concerningly, I am also told that some physiotherapy sessions were conducted away from families without explanation and without consent. That is really serious. Those parents need answers as to why that happened.

If families need to travel outside the State, what would that look like? How would a process like that work? I put it to all the witnesses that it is not acceptable for a family to travel from the west of Ireland for a five-and-a-half-hour appointment and for nobody to even offer them a cup of tea. The witnesses talk about trust, compassion and all the good that CHI does. That is human. That is basic stuff. We are talking about a five-and-a-half-hour appointment after having travelled from the west of Ireland.

On the retrospective review, will these parents and other parents who have children in a similar situation be engaged with when it comes to drafting terms of reference? Will CHI take on board their concerns and their lived experience of this outcome? When findings are being communicated, the families ask that it be done with full and open disclosure. Ms Nugent said there had been informed consent from parents in terms of the novel procedures that were carried out. I put it to her that some of the parents say something very different - that they did not give informed consent.

Another very reasonable ask is that when the review results are published, none of them would be labelled as inconclusive. These parents want answers. They want full and complete answers. Will everyone on the panel be independent international paediatric consultants with no affiliation to CHI? Who are they, where are they from and what is their expertise?