Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

As strange is it may seem, the odd patient comes to us politicians to make a complaint from time to time. I often wonder whether it might be better for the system to respond without prejudice and to talk about arbitration or whatever the case may be. One can achieve quite a lot without massive costs. This is not a stroke against my colleague or anything like that but I have to mention a recent experience I had where a legal practitioner became very animated when it was discovered I had been probing the system to ascertain what went wrong. It was not a deliberate mistake but it was a simple thing that could happen. Like Murphy's Law, if it can happen it will happen. The point I am trying to get as is we need to use open disclosure to a greater extent, particularly when it is there. It is there for a purpose. I do not think it undermines the case. I do not think it will open up floodgates. If it does open up floodgates that has to be looked at again. The United States is a classic example. We all know about that. It has been that way for the past 40 years at least. It is getting better or worse as the case may be.

To go back to Professor Hill, when the patient is diagnosed with cancer, and let us assume she goes home and discusses it with friends and family, which is a natural thing, it is a very difficult, isolated and frightening position to be in. Can Professor Hill tell her with any degree of certainty, given that the screening system is not 100% accurate, that it is 75%, 80% or 90% accurate?