Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire (Cork South Central, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I, too, raise the case of Vicky Phelan. Anyone who watched or listened to her making a statement outside the Four Courts yesterday could not help but be moved by her heartbreaking words. Mr. Justice Cross described Ms Phelan as one of the most impressive witnesses he had ever encountered. She is a remarkably brave and courageous woman and I extend solidarity and support to her and her family at this extremely difficult time.

The details of Ms Phelan's case are shocking. To provide a timeline, on 24 May 2011, Ms Phelan had a smear test. She was given the all clear on 17 June 2011. On 9 June 2014, her next smear was found to be symptomatic and this triggered her inclusion in the review taking place at the time, which found, on 31 October 2015, that a serious error had been made. On 21 July 2016, Ms Phelan's doctor was informed of this but it was not until 27 September 2017 that Ms Phelan was informed. It is my understanding that the period between 21 July 2016 and 27 September 2017 is filled with correspondence between her doctor, Dr. Kevin Hickey, and Professor Gráinne Flannelly. I understand there was a dispute as to who had the responsibility to inform Ms Phelan. It seems that in all these cases the last person to know is the woman affected. According to Ms Phelan's solicitor, Mr. Cian O'Carroll, if her cervical cancer had been detected in 2011, Ms Phelan could have undergone treatment and stood a 90% chance of being cured. She now has terminal cancer.

Other women listening to Ms Phelan's story will be worried, confused and frightened. Documents from Ms Phelan's case indicate that up to 14 other women diagnosed with cervical cancer had previously been told their smear tests were normal. Anyone seeking reassurance will not have found it this morning if they listened to an interview with Dr. Jerome Coffey. In response to straightforward questions, Dr. Coffey obfuscated and avoided answering. He was not able to state how many women had been affected by misdiagnosis or whether all of them had been informed. He could not even indicate whether doctors were obliged to inform patients who had been misdiagnosed. While I did not hear the interview with Professor Flannelly, I was informed of it and significant questions remain outstanding. How many patients were misdiagnosed and have they been informed of their misdiagnosis?

I understand there is a contractual obligation to inform women within four weeks if a problem is identified with a smear test. If a problem is found in a subsequent review, why does a similar contractual obligation not apply? Given the contractual obligation to inform women of problems identified in a smear test, why are women not told as soon as possible of problems identified with a smear test in a subsequent review?

See this speech in context