Dan Boyle (Green Party)

My father died of cancer of the colon. He was 52 years of age when he was first diagnosed. I was 17 and in my leaving certificate year. He was lucky that the diagnosis was relatively quick. In spite of that, and having an excellent surgeon and team of nurses, he went through three very debilitating operations in six months before he came home. It was a cancer that recurred over ten year periods. The second time, ten years later, he was more prepared to deal with it, knew what it was about and was more used to the side effects such as the use of colostomy bags. When discussing awareness, we should not only consider the onset of the condition, but living with it as well, and today's debate is very useful in airing these matters. The third time it occurred, he was 73 years of age and had lost the reserves to fight it. During the intervening 20 years, which was a gift, he lived a very normal life and was, as people in the Chamber are aware, a colourful character. My family were also lucky that my mother was a full-time nurse which meant we had advantages other families would not have had in identifying the causes and living with the condition.

I am conscious that I am not too many years shy of when my father was first diagnosed. Having listened to many of the risk factors outlined today, my personal awareness has been heightened especially. As Senator Quinn stated, the value of the Chamber is in discoursing on subjects in a broader sense which do not receive an airing in the other House and in helping to inform a public debate which would not occur otherwise.

There is a need to be more open about the existence of the condition, its prevalence and the fact the many thousands of people in families are living with this every day. We must be more pre-emptive in helping to identify it through our health service. The level of access to and use of colonoscopies is unacceptable. The political system must ask the necessary questions, such as why the barriers which exist are in place how they can be prevented. As Senator Quinn stated, there is a reluctance to air and discuss these issues and there may even be a gender issue concerning how we discuss them in general. In terms of a national cancer strategy, I hope the existence of debates such as this will help to promote and inform what we need to know in this area.

Apart from the lifestyle issues and issues of physical condition that are relevant factors, the issue of family history is also very important. Subsequent to the death of my father, a brother of his also succumbed to the same condition. We should be especially aware of the genetic factors when alerting people to the diagnostic facilities available. They should be available as much as possible and to as many people as possible to give a general sense of the prevalence and onset of the condition, and this is not the case at present. One could argue that lack of resources is the reason behind this, but it is probably more a matter of political will and commitment. This is not a criticism of the Government or even of the political system. One good aspect of this debate is that points are being made in a cross-party way and more out of sadness and sorrow for the fact that we have a difficulty within our system which must be tackled.

In terms of general awareness, there is a lack of openness in our society and we should encourage a greater level of it among younger people. I find myself in my mid-40s nudging towards the end of my fourth decade and these are subjects about which I would not have thought of or talked about previously and to which the generations behind me give no consideration whatsoever. However, the lifestyle factors inherent in increasing the risk of the condition are borne by the lives of some people in their late 20s, 30s and early 40s. The job of work which must be done in terms of health promotion and awareness should be especially directed at such age groups. While the discussion refers to the group at risk, namely, those aged 50 years and above, and those living with and suffering from the condition, far more needs to be done in the education area and in identifying the risks before people reach that age. I hope this debate is an important part of that. The Seanad should play a greater role in highlighting the issue. The debate will be better served by whatever individual and personal stories we have to help inform it.