Paudge Connolly (Cavan-Monaghan, Independent)

I welcome the opportunity to debate the ongoing difficulties, suffering and trauma experienced by more than 100 women arising from their maltreatment at Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital, Drogheda. Recently, I was invited to a meeting in Drogheda by a group called Patient Focus in Drogheda which wanted assistance in having its members experience at the hands of a consultant obstetrician and gynaecologist in Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital dealt with. The President of the Medical Council acknowledged in a report that women, babies and families were damaged in the hospital. This was very strong talk from the President of the Medical Council. I will quote an extract from a report on the fitness to practice of the consultant. It reads as follows:

The Report makes difficult and distressing reading. It tells the story of a tragedy which has very seriously injured you and other women. [This relates to ten chosen women from the fitness to practice committee investigating Mr. Neary]. The fact that you and other women could come to such harm at the hands of a member of my profession is something which I and other members of the Medical Council find unacceptable. The apology which I extend to you for that hurt cannot turn back the clock but may help a little in dealing with its consequences.

This is an apology which goes some way towards alleviating the suffering of these women. These people, who want to meet the Minister for Health and Children, have been ignored. They have sought a meeting for six years and it would help to bring some form of closure to their position. Approximately 130 women are living with the consequences of this butchery, which is the only way I can describe it. To add insult to injury, in most cases these women may have gone into hospital to have a small cyst removed, or to have a minor operation, and they were told afterwards that they were exceptionally lucky to be alive, it was a miracle they were still here and this consultant had just saved their lives. These women believed this. Later on, they met others who were also told they were lucky. Wombs were removed from women or girls as young as 19 years of age. Ovaries were removed from these women, which is a tragedy. They feel that every possible obstacle is being put in their way of having their complaints addressed.

Of the 130 claims lodged, upwards of 45 have been settled, but 39 files have gone missing. We will never know whether they were burned, but we know they are missing and there is no record of them. One must presume that something is being hidden. There are a number of incomplete files, files badly written up and sections missing from files. This is almost sufficient for a further inquiry.

What happened in Drogheda should send a message to the rest of the country. It was a student nurse who raised the alarm that something was wrong. Many professionals should have picked up on what was happening. We must ask whether sufficient safeguards are in place in this regard. Perhaps there should be comparators with different hospitals or at different monthly meetings in terms of whether something has gone beyond the bounds of what is normal. One would expect to experience just one such case in a lifetime, or one every ten years, yet a multiple of cases were involved in Drogheda.

The demands of the Patient Focus group are not very high. The group wants a firm commitment from the Government that a redress board will be established. There is a report by Judge Maureen Harding Clark and it is believed that these people can work together. There is a precedent for setting up such a board. A redress board was set up following the Stardust disaster. It would help to bring closure to what happened in Drogheda. Some of these people are unfit to go into an open court to plead their case.

See this speech in context