Dáil debates

Tuesday, 13 October 2009

Medical Practitioners (Professional Indemnity)(Amendment) Bill 2009: Second Stage

 

12:00 pm

Photo of Jan O'SullivanJan O'Sullivan (Limerick East, Labour)

-----would be better spent in the overall health budget. As Members are only too aware of the various areas in which more moneys need to be spent, I will not list them. The New Zealand system should be examined with a view to introducing it in Ireland.

The Minister of State said the Medical Council's guide to ethical conduct and behaviour provides that doctors must ensure they have adequate professional indemnity for the work they perform. The problem is that it is only a guide, not obligatory. It is therefore possible for people to ignore or not to be aware of this guide.

Several speakers referred to the large costs involved in indemnity in obstetrics where mistakes have been made. Very often they are not actual mistakes but misadventures surrounding a child's birth. The claims are large because of the long-term effect for a child. The clinical indemnity scheme has been a way of addressing the difficult issues in this area.

The Health Information and Quality Authority, HIQA, does a very good inspection job but primarily deals with public health institutions. There is an urgent need to regulate private medicine. With the current spirit of collaboration, I should perhaps not have a go at the political ideology of the Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Harney, with regard to co-location and the encouragement of private medicine across the system. It is a matter that profoundly disturbs me, however, and is not in accordance with the Labour Party's philosophy. If much more private medical care is to be introduced in the system, it must be properly regulated and controlled.

In the past week I have noted an advertisement for a certain private hospital's cancer services. While the State is rationalising cancer services into eight specialist centres, with large demonstrations against such moves, especially in the north west, it seems a private hospital can have the numbers of patients going through its cancer services which are nowhere near the critical mass we are told are essential in cancer care. It is urgent there is proper monitoring, control and investigation of private health care providers. Many small private health care units can go on their merry way without any great investigation or inspection from the State. That does no service to their patients. In many cases, people pay high private insurance premia when they could get much better cover if they stuck with the public health system. People, however, go into the private system because they can buy attention and care faster in it.

Deputy Reilly's Bill addresses private practitioners who carry out procedures in this country but who may not have adequate cover. They tend to be practising in areas that would not be normally dealt with in the acute hospital services. They are, however, increasingly becoming a feature of this country's and other countries' health systems.

I note the Minister will accept Deputy Reilly's Bill but her amendment seeks until 31 January to discuss further the issues around the legislation. While that sounds reasonable to me, this legislation is required and there should be no great delay in whatever deliberations are necessary on the Government's part. I commend Deputy Reilly on introducing the legislation.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.