Mary Harney (Dublin Mid West, Progressive Democrats)

It is important to state that there is a level of error in reading X-rays. If memory serves me right, this is in the region of 4% to 5% worldwide. The system is not perfect. The focus on health reform is to minimise the capacity for making errors by having a number of clinicians working together, having the most modern imagery and so on.

What happened in this case was that four patients with cancer had their initial diagnoses delayed. They were suffering from lung cancer, which we know is very serious. We could have decided to concentrate on those four patients — a review of those four patients is being led by Professor Muiris Fitzgerald — to establish whether the delay contributed in any way to their death or inappropriate treatment. As a precaution, it was decided that all the work of the particular radiologist should be reviewed and I believe this is appropriate.

In the past, people had to litigate to get answers. I stated previously in the House that Margaret Murphy, whose son Kevin died at the age of 19 in a hospital in this country, from adverse events that should not have happened, could not get answers and had to litigate. When she succeeded in getting compensation she gave it to a charity. That era is over. Many people advised that we did not need to conduct this type of look-back, that a sample look-back would be enough or that we should not inform the patients involved but after doing the look-back only contact those patients about whom an issue arises. There is some merit in that because patients who receive the letter will be concerned. I accept that and I wish it did not have to happen. We need to be straight and open with patients. We have assured patients in the documentation, of which I think Deputies have a copy, that this is a precautionary measure. We do not anticipate any problems. If a problem arises, treatment will be forthcoming immediately.

See this speech in context