Louise O'Reilly (Dublin Fingal, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

Every time I have asked a question about this I have been told it is offered where clinically indicated to which I have replied how would someone know it was clinically indicated if the scan is not done. The Minister's commitment is welcome. We will hold him to it because it is a very essential and very basic service.

We have included in this amendment reference to the newborn screening programme. I was compelled to include this having met with Les Martin, an inspiring young father who is campaigning to improve our newborn screening programme. I know Deputy Donnelly and the Minister know Mr. Martin, as does my colleague Deputy Brady, because this young man is from Wicklow. I want to raise some of the issues he has spoken about and speak to the solutions he has also proposed for improving our newborn screening programme and save lives. Newborn screening services in this State screen newborn babies for only eight conditions, whereas Britain screens for nine, Switzerland 13, Sweden 24, Portugal 25 and Italy 40. The failure to screen babies in Ireland to a higher standard has had a devastating effect on many families in the State, including the Martin family. The Minister is aware of this but it did not have to be this way. Les has gone to great lengths to highlight a solution. He presented this a briefing in the audiovisual room organised by Teachta Brady some weeks ago and he outlined what could be done and what we need to do. We need to reform and expand the newborn screening programme and guarantee that every child born in this State has the right to be screened at birth for any disease for which there is a viable treatment. This is what was done in Italy when a law was passed there to ensure that every Italian citizen is entitled by right to be screened at birth for any disease for which there is a viable treatment. It is a sort of 'if the technology and research are there and back it up we should use it' approach. The expansion of the programme would not be a huge cost, but it would have a huge impact and benefit for families and babies, and it would in the long run save the State millions of euro.

Almost daily here we are reminded of the recruitment and retention crisis affecting the health service. The motion outlines how we have just two midwife-led units in place, how we have a shortfall of 200 midwives below the recommended safety levels in the National Maternity Strategy 2016-2026 and how the number of obstetricians per capitais the third lowest in the OECD. The Minister cannot stand over that situation. It is not tenable and it is not right. The health service needs to do more to help women with disabilities when they are planning a family or are pregnant. Where a woman has a disability which makes becoming pregnant more difficult or carrying a child to birth more difficult, specialist medical help should be provided. This care should be continuously provided from family planning stage all the way through to post-natal care.

I included a reference to the new national maternity hospital in my amendment because I want there to be no equivocation. This House agreed in 2017 that the hospital would be kept in State ownership and the people providing the service will have the ability to deliver those services free from any non-medical interference. I ask the Minister to reaffirm that commitment and provide an assurance that the hospital will be delivered and operate along these lines, because there is still some confusion among the public.

See this speech in context