More Irish abuse.. and not even the church this time

My name is URL

http://www.drogheda-independent.ie/breaking-news/national-news/surgery-woman-slams-inquiry-refusal-2071628.html

A mother subjected to agonising pelvis-widening surgery has called on Health Minister Mary Harney to spend a day in her pain-ridden body.

Kathleen Naughton said an immediate inquiry would be held into the horrific symphysiotomy procedure if the minister felt her distress for a day.

Ms Harney has refused to hold a review into the controversial operation which was performed on hundreds of pregnant women up to the early 1980s, supposedly to ease delivery of their babies.

Ms Naughton, 58, from Duleek, Co Meath, criticised her decision not to hold an investigation into the pelvis-severing practice, which went on for several decades.

"If she was in my body for one day we'd have the review the next day, that's the truth," she said.

"That day 33 years ago evil hit my body and that evil has not left me - my career, everything has diminished because of what happened to me. The state has neglected us. We're fighting for everything and they're putting all these blocks in front of us."

Campaign group Survivors of Symphysiotomy said the Government had ignored the plight of many mothers left with long-term health problems including incontinence, back pain and depression.

A Department of Health spokesman said the minister had decided a review would not be productive.

"The purpose of conducting a review of health policy or medical practice is primarily to examine past events so as to improve care for patients," he said. In the case of symphysiotomy the practice is now extremely rare in Ireland, having been superseded by caesarean section since the early 1980s."

But Colm MacGeehin, solicitor to 111 mothers who underwent symphysiotomy, said Minister Harney had turned her back on the women and should resign.

How the fcuk can this useless bitch even contemplate refusing to launch an inquiry into what was done to these women without their consent? It's one thing saying that this technique was more widely used than caesarean section at that time, but surely it still required the consent of the patients before it was carried out

No bother to her rushing through populist legislation against head-shops though.. sure that's the real problem with this country :rolleyes:

Biggins

Yea, I just mentioned that in the Louth section.

Friday, 19 February 2010 19:49

The Minister for Health has ruled out any review of the use of symphysiotomy in Irish hospitals.
The group Survivors of Symphysiotomy had called on Taoiseach Brian Cowen to initiate an immediate inquiry into use of the pelvis-severing childbirth surgery in Ireland.
Decades after the practice was discontinued in developed countries, symphysiotomies were still carrried out in Irish maternity units.

The development follows last night's RTÉ Prime Time programme, which documented that Ireland is the only country in the developed world where symphysiotomy was widely practiced in the 20th century.
The programme found that these operations were widespread from 1944 to 1983.
The investigation established that 1,500 women underwent the procedure here, which involved sawing through the pelvic bone to assist with childbirth. Patient permission was rarely sought.
It frequently left the women with chronic physical pain and incontinence. The procedure was abandoned in most maternity units in the 1960s, but continued until 1983 in Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital in Drogheda.

The survivors' group has called for the removal from office of Minister for Health Mary Harney if she will not order a review of the cases.
The minister said reviews are carried out to improve care for patients and as symphysiotomy was superseded by Caesarean section in the 1980s, any review would not now be productive.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/0219/symphysiotomy.html

The Drogheda hospital is the one where other scandals were discovered, yet amazingly the victims to those still have yet to see anything they can call justice!
Its one thing after another with that hospital and Harney is proving to be ineffectual.

...the minister had decided a review would not be productive.

Translated? Schit - another can of worms we don't want to open - after all, we were in charge - again and again!

OutlawPete

My name is URL wrote: »

No bother to her rushing through populist legislation against head-shops though.. sure that's the real problem with this country :rolleyes:

Hit the nail on the head.

The only time the government do anything these days is to make it look as if they are doing something, hence the head shops.

Now that this is in the media, they might take some action.

If it's not in the media, they ignore it.

That's why the government are mad set on silencing the media on as many matters as possible, as they can't stand that they are the ones will the real power.

ibarelycare

Maybe Joe Duffy should do a campaign on it...then they'll finally take notice :rolleyes:

My name is URL

Biggins wrote: »

"The minister decided that a review would not be productive"

That just says it all really.. what productivity does she want? It'd be productive for the people who were put through the ordeal and are now living in pain, at least someone would be held accountable for it

Maybe not directly the church. But to stop the "temptation of using contraception" you can see that it has alot to do with them.

It's absolutely beyond horrific what happened to these women and that stupid see you next tuesday of a woman won't do anything to get answers. Are we really surprised?

minidazzler

OK, I would usually never back up Mary Harney, but WHY should there be a review?

It's not done anymore so it wouldn't change anything!

Someone should be held accountable? Who? Miss Harney? Because she was just a tween when these procedures were standard practice.

Seriously, since it's not done anymore I see no need for a review.

Super-Rush

I used to be proud of being Irish.

entropic

This is just absolutely mind boggling, just another thing that we will let slip by not holding anyone at blame accountable.

There is too many "Doctors" still practicing that should have their licences revoked for doing this but of course it would be too much of a scandal and we couldn't be having one of those so soon after the last one.

Fear Uladh

minidazzler wrote: »

OK, I would usually never back up Mary Harney, but WHY should there be a review?

It's not done anymore so it wouldn't change anything!

Someone should be held accountable? Who? Miss Harney? Because she was just a tween when these procedures were standard practice.

Seriously, since it's not done anymore I see no need for a review.

Thats like saying the christian brothers dont abuse kids anymore so there shouldnt be any reports on that

There should be some sort of support or compensation paid to the victims they are probably struggling with medical bills etc.

Biggins

minidazzler wrote: »

OK, I would usually never back up Mary Harney, but WHY should there be a review?
It's not done anymore so it wouldn't change anything!
Someone should be held accountable? Who? Miss Harney? Because she was just a tween when these procedures were standard practice.
Seriously, since it's not done any more I see no need for a review.

I can see your point and it has some merit.
One thing that strikes me is that questions should be asked as to how such a procedure was allowed continue for so long when across Europe and else where, the same practises were abandoned and considered maybe something from the dark ages.
Arising from that, comes the next stage; if such practises that prove to be damaging mentally and physically to the patient, what or where is the safeguards to stop such events/operations happening again in the future or now?

A review is not necessarily about the past but also about the future (in this case, of medicine) and how to safeguard further the right way of doing things and how to halt the bad ways.
It can be a learning process - if only to stop medical litigation and mental/physical pain later on.

My name is URL

minidazzler wrote: »

OK, I would usually never back up Mary Harney, but WHY should there be a review?

It's not done anymore so it wouldn't change anything!

Someone should be held accountable? Who? Miss Harney? Because she was just a tween when these procedures were standard practice.

Seriously, since it's not done anymore I see no need for a review.

They shouldn't have been carrying out that procedure in the first place esp without any consent..

Of course someone should be held to account over it.. what does ignoring it achieve, and what message does it send out? "Ah sure do what you have to do, if anyone gets hurt along the way we won't blame you"

Lourdes hospital has been in the spotlight before, so something is systematically wrong in that place

Dr Michael Shine abused a number of kids there, and walked free from court after it.. and 100 women had their wombs removed unnecessarily

brummytom

Deleted User wrote: »

Maybe not directly the church. But to stop the "temptation of using contraception" you can see that it has alot to do with them.

If anything, wouldn't performing an agonising procedure on pregnant women encourage contraception?

ejmaztec

Seems to me that the women would have been better treated in a butcher's shop. Talk about third world!

What other primitive bullsh1t's going to come out of the woodwork?

brummytom

brummytom wrote: »

If anything, wouldn't performing an agonising procedure on pregnant women encourage contraception?

You would think wouldn't you?
It made it easier to deliver future babies apparently.

The_Minister

Biggins wrote: »

Translated? Schit - another can of worms we don't want to open - after all, we were in charge!

So were the opposition.

This isn't a Fianna Fail problem.

pookie82

Deleted User wrote: »

Maybe not directly the church. But to stop the "temptation of using contraception" you can see that it has alot to do with them.

I only just realised this connection now - hadn't heard this before. Absolutely fcuking unbelievable. Catholic church strikes again:mad:

They believed that women subjected to a caesarean would be encouraged to use contraception - what was their point here? That a c-section was so painful/stressful women wouldn't want anymore kids? Did they think this was a more painless alternative????

Biggins

The_Minister wrote: »

So were the opposition.
This isn't a Fianna Fail problem.

To be fair, true part of the time - a tiny part of the time.
As the latter years (and before for a long period) were taken over by the current lot in power, they should have redressed the situation when the rest of Europe dumped the procedure rapidly.
It wasn't as if they weren't around long enough to notice and learn!

You point is accurate and still stands though to be fair.
It is however since FF came to power again and again, something that went on and something that should have been inquired about if only to see justice be done for those of the past, future mistakes and how to safeguard against them with other procedures.

partyatmygaff

Deleted User wrote: »

Maybe not directly the church. But to stop the "temptation of using contraception" you can see that it has alot to do with them.

How does a medical procedure have ANYTHING to do with the catholic church? Seriously, they aren't the cause of ALL of Irelands problems despite what you might want to think.

pookie82

partyatmygaff wrote: »

How does a medical procedure have ANYTHING to do with the catholic church? Seriously, they aren't the cause of ALL of Irelands problems despite what you might want to think.

http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/extract/323/7316/809/a

"Many symphysiotomies were done in Roman Catholic countries, because contraception was illegal, even for medical indications, and women might have many caesarean sections with all the inherent risks."

http://www.irishhealth.com/article.html?id=16907

"It is believed that the procedure was encouraged by Catholic obstetricians as a birth-facilitating alternative to caesarean section, as it was believed that women facing repeated caesareans for future births might be tempted to use contraception".

http://www.sinnfein.ie/contents/381

"Is the Taoiseach aware that this procedure, while ostensibly done to deal with obstructed births, was inflicted on women primarily because the hospitals operated under a so-called Catholic ethos whereby surgeons deemed such operations preferable to caesarean sections, after which it was thought women would use contraception or be sterilised to avoid further sections?"

Overheal

I wish I could say I was surprised. The only thing that cow is interested in is her own ass as a flotation device.

Gods forbid she should uphold the dignity of her office and be the Minister for Health.

entropic

The_Minister wrote: »

So were the opposition.

This isn't a Fianna Fail problem.

Yes it is now, instead of worrying about what it might do to them I am sure their spin doctors can make it look like they are doing a good thing by opening a case on this. They are the ones with the power so it is their responsibility.

K-9

The IMO have serious questions to answer too.

oppenheimer1

My name is URL wrote: »

That just says it all really.. what productivity does she want? It'd be productive for the people who were put through the ordeal and are now living in pain, at least someone would be held accountable for it

The people in charge of the health service between 1960 - 1980 are most certainly retired, if not dead at this stage.

Why are we only hearing about this now? How come a fuss hasn't been kicked up sooner?

MaybeLogic

pookie82 wrote: »

http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/extract/323/7316/809/a

"Many symphysiotomies were done in Roman Catholic countries, because contraception was illegal, even for medical indications, and women might have many caesarean sections with all the inherent risks."

http://www.irishhealth.com/article.html?id=16907

"It is believed that the procedure was encouraged by Catholic obstetricians as a birth-facilitating alternative to caesarean section, as it was believed that women facing repeated caesareans for future births might be tempted to use contraception".

http://www.sinnfein.ie/contents/381

"Is the Taoiseach aware that this procedure, while ostensibly done to deal with obstructed births, was inflicted on women primarily because the hospitals operated under a so-called Catholic ethos whereby surgeons deemed such operations preferable to caesarean sections, after which it was thought women would use contraception or be sterilised to avoid further sections?"

Turns out the Church had an influence after all.

pookie82

MaybeLogic wrote: »

Turns out the Church had an influence after all.

Just a little:mad:

Fear Uladh

partyatmygaff wrote: »

How does a medical procedure have ANYTHING to do with the catholic church? Seriously, they aren't the cause of ALL of Irelands problems despite what you might want to think.

Oh they are the cause of a lot of pain. They probably directed the whole thing.

Ihaveanopinion

This procedure was done to allow for safe delivery of babies in the context of it being unsafe to perform a C-section. It is still, apparently, done in countries where it is not safe to do a C-section (2nd/3rd world).

This took place 28 years ago.

There is nothing to be gained from an inquiry.

pookie82

Ihaveanopinion wrote: »

This procedure was done to allow for safe delivery of babies in the context of it being unsafe to perform a C-section. It is still, apparently, done in countries where it is not safe to do a C-section (2nd/3rd world).

This took place 28 years ago.

There is nothing to be gained from an inquiry.

Yes but I think the point is that it became a much safer option to perform c-sections here long after this was still being carried out. That's the problem. It was carried out right up until the 80s, when medical advancements meant a c-section was a much safer option and there was no need to put women through this procedure.

Biggins

It should be pointed out that the hospital was staffed by the Medical Missionary of Mary organisation for a long period.
While the government of the day looked after the rules, regulations and handed out the cash for procedures, they allowed the Missionary organisation carte-blanch to do what the hell they wanted to - and the question arises also - WHY!

Ihaveanopinion

again -- in context - 28 years ago.

an inquiry would cost a lot of money - take a lot of time - and would result in no change in practices because practices have changed a long time ago.

My name is URL

Ihaveanopinion wrote: »

This procedure was done to allow for safe delivery of babies in the context of it being unsafe to perform a C-section. It is still, apparently, done in countries where it is not safe to do a C-section (2nd/3rd world).

This took place 28 years ago.

There is nothing to be gained from an inquiry.

It was done without consent.. that alone warrants an inquiry. At the very least there should be a redress for the women affected

The fact that Harney has the face to say that an inquiry would not be productive says what exactly about the medical profession in Ireland and particularly in the Lourdes hospital? I mean c'mon, if this was the first scandal to arise from there then maybe it could be swept aside as an isolated problem, but it's in a long list of scandals and I'm sure more will probably arise too... unless something is done

Ihaveanopinion

The notion of informed consent is a recent event. This was no the standard in 1982 or before.

Nothing done back in the early 80s was done with informed consent as we know it today. You are judging 28 years ago by todays standard. That is not appropriate.

on the note of 'something has to be done', many things have been done. Practices have long changed. This procedure is no longer done and has not been done for 28 years!! What exactly would you like to achieve with an inquiry???

The doctor who performed most of these procedures is dead along with most of the administration involved at the time

Biggins

Ihaveanopinion wrote: »

again -- in context - 28 years ago.

an inquiry would cost a lot of money - take a lot of time - and would result in no change in practices because practices have changed a long time ago.

However those that were mistreated still have to live with the suffering and pain.
Do they not deserve at to see that a review is carried out and lessons can be learned for the future, for at least their and our children?
That further safeguards are effective and put in place - and not just for this hospital.

walshb

partyatmygaff wrote: »

How does a medical procedure have ANYTHING to do with the catholic church? Seriously, they aren't the cause of ALL of Irelands problems despite what you might want to think.

Hey, very very little went on in this country without some Catholic Church
influence. The Lourdes is and was a ****ing hell hole. Butchers.

Wasn't it nice to see Neary looking ever so fresh. That scumbag should be in jail.

Ihaveanopinion

Treatment is available to anyone with problem. All Irish people are entitled to free medical care in the Irish healthcare system.

What lessons? This practice isn't done anymore...

oppenheimer1

My name is URL wrote: »

It was done without consent.. that alone warrants an inquiry. At the very least there should be a redress for the women affected

The fact that Harney has the face to say that an inquiry would not be productive says what exactly about the medical profession in Ireland and particularly in the Lourdes hospital? I mean c'mon, if this was the first scandal to arise from there then maybe it could be swept aside as an isolated problem, but it's in a long list of scandals and I'm sure more will probably arise too... unless something is done

If the women in question feel they have a case they can take both the hospitals and the ob-gyn to court in a civil case.

The last case was 28 years ago I have to ask the question why now? One must assume these women have been suffering for years

pookie82

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

If the women in question feel they have a case they can take both the hospitals and the ob-gyn to court in a civil case.

The last case was 28 years ago I have to ask the question why now? One must assume these women have been suffering for years

I did hear about these cases before, this isn't the first time it's been in the press by any stretch.

The Prime Time special just reignited the public's horror and the affected women's quest for justice.

Biggins

Ihaveanopinion wrote: »

What lessons? This practice isn't done any more...

Lessons that involve other treatments that might be found to be causing pain and suffering, How they can be stopped? What safeguards are there to stop them?
How a patient can maintain/regain their rights to what is being done to them while awake or under an anaesthetic ...just to begin with.

And we still haven't addressed the suffering, pain and re-dressing to the actual inflicted.
If its let go as an issue, what are we saying? If time drags on long enough, you can get away with anything?

I debated if to mention this or not but on reflection though it might help things if I did.

I have a brother (older) that was born in the Drogheda hospital.
During the birthing procedure of him, something went wrong and the staff managed to allow the cord to wrap around his neck and starve him of oxygen to the brain.
long story short, today he has severe brain damage, suffers daily from gran-mal seizures and is totally dependent on the rest of the family for even basic things like feeding etc.
Why didn't the ma and da sue at the time? Thats a question I often asked over the latter years - and the reply was always basically the same thing - it wasn't the done thing at the time, the doc were treated like gods and anyone that challenged them or the hospital was shunned to one side, stigmatised and treated like dirt.

Its because of that terrible attitude that these things that went on before are only NOW coming to light.

Denerick

Delete

oppenheimer1

pookie82 wrote: »

I did hear about these cases before, this isn't the first time it's been in the press by any stretch.

The Prime Time special just reignited the public's horror and the affected women's quest for justice.

That answers my second question but it still doesn't explain the lack of court cases. All women affected can take a case for redress if they so desire. An inquiry would be a waste of time as it wouldn't have any recommendations for change to make as practices changed a long time ago.

In other words, nothing would be learned.

Ihaveanopinion

Biggins wrote: »

Lessons that involve other treatments that might be found to be causing pain and suffering, How they can be stopped? What safeguards are there to stop them?
How a patient can maintain/regain their rights to what is being done to them while awake or under an anaesthetic ...just to begin with.

And we still haven't addressed the suffering, pain and re-dressing to the actual inflicted.
If its let go as an issue, what are we saying? If time drags on long enough, you can get away with anything?

Ok - In todays modern medical practice, all patients have to give informed consent before undergoing any procedure. If something gets done to you without consent, you can sue - unless its an emergency. Thats your first concern addressed

The suffering/pain etc etc - all patients are entitled to free care under the Irish healthcare system.

In terms of time, the Statute of Limitations for Medical Negligence is two years. HOWEVER, that wasnt negligent 28 years ago. It would be now.

I'll say it one more time - 28 years - medical practice has changed considerable since

Biggins

Ihaveanopinion wrote: »

I'll say it one more time - 28 years - medical practice has changed considerable since

...but a lot of attitudes of those still in charge haven't!
Again, yet another issue that needs to be addressed.

MaybeLogic

Ihaveanopinion wrote: »

In terms of time, the Statute of Limitations for Medical Negligence is two years. HOWEVER, that wasnt negligent 28 years ago. It would be now.

I'll say it one more time - 28 years - medical practice has changed considerable since

The women fully deserve a hearing and compensation and, to be frank, if it's a further nail in the coffin of the pernicious influence of Catholic Ireland, so be it.

My name is URL

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

That answers my second question but it still doesn't explain the lack of court cases. All women affected can take a case for redress if they so desire. An inquiry would be a waste of time as it wouldn't have any recommendations for change to make as practices changed a long time ago.

In other words, nothing would be learned.

Just because practices have changed doesn't mean that the victims don't deserve an explanation as to how & why it happened, and happened so prominently in one particular hospital.

As I said before, this case is one in a long line of questionable practices that took place in the Lourdes. Surely there needs to be a thorough investigation into how so many scandals have taken place in that hospital.

Neary's last non-consenual womb removal was in '98 afaik.. that's by no means a different time with different protocols in place.. patient records have disappeared from the hospital in some cases too.

Ihaveanopinion

MaybeLogic wrote: »

The women fully deserve a hearing and compensation and, to be frank, if it's a further nail in the coffin of the pernicious influence of Catholic Ireland, so be it.

I'm afraid you can't attack the Church for 'compensation'.

If they want to take a case, the civil courts are open to them. If they are successful, they will win costs and it wont cost them anything.

It would be a waste of public money for an independant inquiry

Biggins

My name is URL wrote: »

...patient records have disappeared from the hospital in some cases too.

...By co-incidence :rolleyes:, including my brothers!

Ihaveanopinion

Ihaveanopinion wrote: »

Ok - In todays modern medical practice, all patients have to give informed consent before undergoing any procedure. If something gets done to you without consent, you can sue - unless its an emergency. Thats your first concern addressed

There was an article recently (I can't remember which paper it was in, I have it in work). Which reported that women undergoing gynecological examinations under anaesthetia were, in alot of cases, being examined by a student doctor/nurse while anaesthetised, without giving their consent, this was carrying on until very recently (as in last year). So what you state above should be true by law, but it isn't always the reality.

MaybeLogic

Ihaveanopinion wrote: »

I'm afraid you can't attack the Church for 'compensation'.

If they want to take a case, the civil courts are open to them. If they are successful, they will win costs and it wont cost them anything.

It would be a waste of public money for an independant inquiry

I didn't mean they should get compo from the Church.

I don't believe it's a waste of money bringing these things to light if it helps to prevent future abuses

Ihaveanopinion

My name is URL wrote: »

Just because practices have changed doesn't mean that the victims don't deserve an explanation as to how & why it happened, and happened so prominently in one particular hospital.

As I said before, this case is one in a long line of questionable practices that took place in the Lourdes. Surely there needs to be a thorough investigation into how so many scandals have taken place in that hospital.

Neary's last non-consenual womb removal was in '98 afaik.. that's by no means a different time with different protocols in place.. patient records have disappeared from the hospital in some cases too.

28 years ago - most of the relevent people are dead!

Neary's thing has already been examined.

Ihaveanopinion

Deleted User wrote: »

There was an article recently (I can't remember which paper it was in, I have it in work). Which reported that women undergoing gynecological examinations under anaesthetia were, in alot of cases, being examined by a student doctor/nurse while anaesthetised, without giving their consent, this was carrying on until very recently (as in last year). So what you state above should be true by law, but it isn't always the reality.

An examination doesn't require written informed consent. It requires the patient to submit to the examination - implied consent.

If you don't want to be examined by a nurse or by a doctor in training, it is your right not to be examined by them. BUT the patient has to take a bit of responsibility - ask who is examining you and if you have a problem with it say so!