Dáil debates

Tuesday, 3 December 2019

Ceisteanna ó Cheannairí - Leaders' Questions

 

2:30 pm

Photo of Micheál MartinMicheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

We learned from The Irish Times today that a further 60 women have applied to join the 221+ support group for those affected by the CervicalCheck scandal after the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, RCOG, expert panel review found abnormalities in their smear tests as opposed to the original tests. These were women who were originally given the all-clear and later developed cancer. The review has produced a result that was different from the original CervicalCheck finding with very negative implications, as we know, for the treatment these women had to go through and for their health outcomes.

I met one such woman last evening, Bernadette Kiely from Cork, with her daughter, Claudia, who has been advocating for quite some time on behalf of Bernadette. What is quite extraordinary is that it was only in November Bernadette Kiely discovered she was part of the original audit by CervicalCheck. If it was not for her solicitor who sought access to her medical records in October just past, that fact would never have come to light. Mrs. Bernadette Kiely was never informed of the fact she was part of the audit and the audit letter, dated 8 July 2017, from Dr. Flannelly was never disclosed to her.

Ms Kiely has applied to become part of the 221+ group. She is a victim of non-disclosure. She has been rebuffed by the Department. She rang the Minister's office 23 times to try to have a conversation with, and to get access, to him but to no avail. She had to email the Taoiseach's office because she was originally refused a medical card. The daughter did all this work on behalf of her mother because the treatment has left an impact so the daughter is fighting the case. Bernadette should have been entitled to the ex gratia payment just like everybody else. She should have been part of the group. It is inexplicable she was not included from day one.

We need answers to her specific case. As the Taoiseach knows, the HSE has admitted liability for non-disclosure to quite a number of women but not to Bernadette. I have all the documentation and all the letters here confirming all of this. The outcome of the RCOG panel review is that both the cytology and the follow-up on colposcopy were inadequate and lacked active management. Both of these represented missed opportunities to prevent cancer or diagnose it at an earlier stage. There was an earlier referral in 2009 for colposcopy. It was 2015 when the second colposcopy happened and she was detected to have cancer.

How many more Bernadettes are out there that we do not know about? It is extraordinary, given all of the controversy surrounding this issue for the past two years, that there are still stories like Bernadette Kiely surfacing and emerging. All the focus to date has been on cytology. Is the Taoiseach satisfied in terms of the quality control mechanisms on the colposcopy dimension to this issue with regard to many of the women involved?

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.