John Gormley (Dublin South East, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 312: To ask the Tánaiste and Minister for Health and Children the reason Parents for Justice was neither consulted nor included in the drawing up of the terms of reference for the Madden inquiry; the reason these terms of reference did not require Dr. Madden to deliver findings rather than recommendations; the further reason the Madden inquiry was restricted (details supplied) despite assurances given by her to Parents for Justice that all its members would be included in the inquiry; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [24810/05]

John Gormley (Dublin South East, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 313: To ask the Tánaiste and Minister for Health and Children the reason the organ retention inquiry is the only inquiry in the history of the State that has been abandoned before reaching a conclusion; if she will never at any time put the interests of any pharmaceutical company before that of the citizens of Ireland; and if no human tissue or organs will ever again be retained during post-mortem and used for research or teaching or sold to any pharmaceutical company or other institution without the full informed consent of the next of kin. [24811/05]

John Gormley (Dublin South East, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 314: To ask the Tánaiste and Minister for Health and Children if she will be in a position to provide the answers and subsequent closure (details supplied) to parents and relatives at the end of the Madden inquiry; if she will take steps to ensure that the outcome of the Madden report will be delivered to the public in an open and transparent way; if the ethics committees in hospitals were aware of the practise of organ retention; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [24812/05]

Mary Harney (Dublin Mid West, Progressive Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I propose to take Questions Nos. 312 to 314, inclusive, together.

On 1 September 2004, following an examination of the work of all inquiries by the Attorney General, the Government decided that the post mortem inquiry should furnish its final report not later than 31 March 2005 and that the inquiry would then cease to exist. The chairman of the inquiry, Ms Anne Dunne, SC, was so advised and requested to furnish her report to me on or before that date.

She submitted her report on the due date. However, having examined the content of the report, the Attorney General advised me in April that it could not be published, for a number of legal reasons. Government subsequently approved the appointment of Dr. Deirdre Madden, a distinguished expert on medical law and ethics, on 3 May 2005 to provide me with a report on post mortem policy and practice by 21 December 2005.

Following her appointment and prior to finalisation of her terms of reference, Dr. Madden met various groups including Parents for Justice. She has also spoken to key persons in Northern Ireland and the UK who were involved in similar inquiries. In view of the tight timeframe for her work, and in order to deliver a comprehensive report by the December deadline, it was decided to concentrate on children born alive and under 12 years of age. Her terms of reference also include inquiring into allegations that pituitary glands were removed from children undergoing post mortem examination for sale to pharmaceutical companies within and outside the State. On 14 July Government agreed the terms of reference for Dr Madden's work.

I am hopeful that Dr. Madden's analysis of the material available and her contact with relevant agencies will result in a comprehensive report that will help to put closure on the matter for the many families and next of kin affected by post mortem practice and organ retention. Dr. Madden has assured me that it is her intention that I will receive her report at the end of December.

I am unsure whether the issue of organ retention would have been brought to the attention of, or discussed by hospitals' ethics committees until the period in 1999 when the matter was first highlighted.

In late 1999, my Department wrote to all health boards and hospitals requesting that they ensure that a policy of informed consent should operate in relation to the retention of organs following post mortem examination. In February 2000 the faculty of pathology issued its guidelines for post mortem consent and retention of tissues at post mortem examination. The Health Service Executive has confirmed that guidelines and protocols are in place for families with regard to both coroners' and non-coroners' post mortems. In accordance with these guidelines, families are to be informed when retention takes place in a coroner's post mortem and permission is to be sought to retention in the case of a non-coroner's post mortem.