Smear Test Scandal

AllForIt · 02-05-2018 11:52PM

Can someone tell me why smear tests are provided for by the state in the first place? I mean is this form of cancer particularly high or what? Can I as a guy go to my GP and have a prostate cancer test at any particular time I choose?

Kuva · 03-05-2018 12:07AM

Years ago someone asked for a scandal forum to be created on this site for all these sorts of things to put in and viewable at a quick glance.

It didn't happen.

It'd be some list now. All the scumbags involved all walk away rich, no repurcussions.

Someone should look at the bowel screening for men outta curiosity.

Harris is a clueless lad, just passing time doing not alot.

ceadaoin. · 03-05-2018 06:37AM

AllForIt wrote: »

Can someone tell me why smear tests are provided for by the state in the first place? I mean is this form of cancer particularly high or what? Can I as a guy go to my GP and have a prostate cancer test at any particular time I choose?

They are provided because the pre cancerous cells are easy to identify and treat and the evidence shows that they reduce deaths from cervical cancer

Re prostate cancer, According to the british cancer society:

Overall, the evidence shows that screening for prostate cancer doesn’t reduce the number of men dying from the disease, but does increase the risk of harms such as overdiagnosis, where slow-growing tumours that wouldn’t cause a man any harm are picked up. It can also miss prostate cancers which did need to be found and treated.

If you’re over 50 you can ask your doctor about the prostate specific antigen (PSA) blood test. Having this test carries risk so if you ask for this test, your doctor will discuss it with you

JMNolan · 03-05-2018 07:19AM

marzic wrote: »

http://stateclaims.ie/ezine/meet-the-sca-director-ciaran-breen/

Now here's a public servant who takes his job seriously... shame it involves dragging dying women through the Courts

Oh, is this a new step? Naming people? Perhaps we should look for their home addresses too? Family members perhaps? Why shouldn't the state claims agency defend claims? Are you so blinkered that you think they should pay out on every claim simply based on gender?

Roger_007 · 03-05-2018 08:13AM

One thing that is common to all the health scandals that have occurred in this country is that they were all initially caused by inept or incompetent medical practitioners. Yet, the only people who get off scot free from any criticism are those medical people who caused the problem in the first place.
We pay out huge sums of money in compensation to the victims and do not deal with the real problem of medical incompetence. We then pretend to be surprised when the next scandal occurs.

McCrack · 03-05-2018 08:47AM

JMNolan wrote: »

Oh, is this a new step? Naming people? Perhaps we should look for their home addresses too? Family members perhaps? Why shouldn't the state claims agency defend claims? Are you so blinkered that you think they should pay out on every claim simply based on gender?

There are far too many instances where the State Claims Agency does not settle cases before trial or does not offer any meaningful settlement forcing people into court and for them to lose their privacy/anonymity as a result for them to then settle the case

Thats wrong

JMNolan · 03-05-2018 09:24AM

McCrack wrote: »

There are far too many instances where the State Claims Agency does not settle cases before trial or does not offer any meaningful settlement forcing people into court and for them to lose their privacy/anonymity as a result for them to then settle the case

Thats wrong

Is it though? According to who? Their job is

We provide risk management advice and assistance to State authorities with the aim of reducing future claims and litigation.

Where claims do arise our objective is to manage these claims so as to ensure that the State’s liability and associated expenses are contained at the lowest achievable level.

Are they failing in this?

McCrack · 03-05-2018 09:34AM

No I get that they should where appropriate defend claims however and particularly with medical negligence cases they deny liability until the Plaintiff is forced into Court to open their case

Ive seen it many times

_Dara_ · 03-05-2018 10:02AM

Roger_007 wrote: »

One thing that is common to all the health scandals that have occurred in this country is that they were all initially caused by inept or incompetent medical practitioners. Yet, the only people who get off scot free from any criticism are those medical people who caused the problem in the first place.
We pay out huge sums of money in compensation to the victims and do not deal with the real problem of medical incompetence. We then pretend to be surprised when the next scandal occurs.

This is true. I met a few doctors during my adventures in getting a diagnosis who I genuinely believe should not be practising medicine.

One who sticks in my mind: a GP I went to the 3.5 years ago. I’m going to spoiler tag my symptoms for the benefit of anyone squeamish.

I had pus and blood oozing from my left nipple. Well what was left of it. I was experiencing severe pain in my lower back, ribs and pelvis. And I MEAN severe. AND I couldn’t walk any distance without being severely out of breath.

The doctor did not even do a manual examination. She glanced at my boob and said “That’s an infection, I’ll give you antibiotics.” I still can’t get over it now. Luckily there was a much more conscientious doctor in the same practice who was concerned. He wasn’t quite sure what was wrong with me but he knew my symptoms and elevated white blood cell count were all wrong for a young woman. He was the one who ordered the scans that finally got me diagnosed.

Two very different doctors in the one practice.

whisky_galore · 03-05-2018 10:04AM

If people only put a fraction of the amount of energy campaigning and lobbying to change the clusterfcuk that is the HSE as they do with water, the 8th or potholes, it would have been fixed years ago.

Wanderer78 · 03-05-2018 10:06AM

whisky_galore wrote: »

If people only put a fraction of the amount of energy campaigning and lobbying to change the clusterfcuk that is the HSE as they do with water, the 8th or potholes, it would have been fixed years ago.

fair point, but the workings of our health systems is a far more complex beast, im not convinced any country knows how to truly run one

Squatter · 03-05-2018 10:06AM

marzic wrote: »

http://stateclaims.ie/ezine/meet-the-sca-director-ciaran-breen/

Now here's a public servant who takes his job seriously... shame it involves dragging dying women through the Courts

Sometimes it's a shame and other times it's a necessary evil.

You and others may want the SCA to function as an ATM, but I don't.

SusieBlue · 03-05-2018 10:12AM

whisky_galore wrote: »

If people only put a fraction of the amount of energy campaigning and lobbying to change the clusterfcuk that is the HSE as they do with water, the 8th or potholes, it would have been fixed years ago.

The 8th is a health issue and is not in the same league as the water charges or potholes at all.

neonsofa · 03-05-2018 10:14AM

_Dara_ wrote: »

This is true. I met a few doctors during my adventures in getting a diagnosis who I genuinely believe should not be practising medicine.

One who sticks in my mind: a GP I went to the 3.5 years ago. I’m going to spoiler tag my symptoms for the benefit of anyone squeamish.
I had pus and blood oozing from my left nipple. Well what was left of it. I was experiencing severe pain in my lower back, ribs and pelvis. And I MEAN severe. AND I couldn’t walk any distance without being severely out of breath.

The doctor did not even do a manual examination. She glanced at my boob and said “That’s an infection, I’ll give you antibiotics.” I still can’t get over it now. Luckily there was a much more conscientious doctor in the same practice who was concerned. He wasn’t quite sure what was wrong with me but he knew my symptoms and elevated white blood cell count were all wrong for a young woman. He was the one who ordered the scans that finally got me diagnosed.

Two very different doctors in the one practice.

Dara I have had similar experiences with dismissive healthcare professionals. Thankfully in my own case it wasn't with anything anywhere near as serious as your illness, but in terms of the hand waving "oh it's a mild infection, take this". As they begin writing out a prescription for penicillin which im allergic to. Some of them seem to become complacent over time.

I have found they also tend to be dismissive with new parents ( and i do know there are some helicopter parents who create a drama over sniffles but that doesnt mean all of them do so) in my case I was a young parent so they were even more so. It took many arguments and her deteriorating health to have my baby diagnosed and treated years ago due to the dismissive attitude of consultants who seemed to believe it was my ability,or lack thereof, as a parent that was making her sick rather than her actual illness.

I have read your posts here in relation to your illness and you are inspirational to be honest.

whisky_galore · 03-05-2018 10:17AM

SusieBlue wrote: »

The 8th is a health issue and is not in the same league as the water charges or potholes at all.

Obviously not everyone has to get an abortion but unless you are very very lucky, everyone has to use the health service.

Wanderer78 · 03-05-2018 10:18AM

whisky_galore wrote: »

Obviously not everyone has to get an abortion but unless you are very very lucky, everyone has to use the health service.

critical point, hence the importance of this issue

neonsofa · 03-05-2018 10:20AM

whisky_galore wrote: »

Obviously not everyone has to get an abortion but unless you are very very lucky, everyone has to use the health service.

The 8th affects maternity care, which every pregnant woman (and in turn, every newborn in the country) has to use.

_Dara_ · 03-05-2018 10:20AM

neonsofa wrote: »

Dara I have had similar experiences with dismissive healthcare professionals. Thankfully in my own case it wasn't with anything anywhere near as serious as your illness, but in terms of the hand waving "oh it's a mild infection, take this". As they begin writing out a prescription for penicillin which im allergic to. Some of them seem to become complacent over time.

I have found they also tend to be dismissive with new parents ( and i do know there are some helicopter parents who create a drama over sniffles but that doesnt mean all of them do so) in my case I was a young parent so they were even more so. It took many arguments and her deteriorating health to have my baby diagnosed and treated years ago due to the dismissive attitude of consultants who seemed to believe it was my ability,or lack thereof, as a parent that was making her sick rather than her actual illness.

I have read your posts here in relation to your illness and you are inspirational to be honest.

I can’t believe they didn’t ask if you had any medication allergies!

That is infuriating about your child. Many older doctors are quite condescending.

SusieBlue · 03-05-2018 10:21AM

whisky_galore wrote: »

Obviously not everyone has to get an abortion but unless you are very very lucky, everyone has to use the health service.

It isn't just about abortion.
It affects maternity care for every single pregnant woman, even for wanted pregnancies.
I agree the health service needs improving. But dismissing the 8th to be something as relevant as potholes or the water charges is very wrong.

whisky_galore · 03-05-2018 10:23AM

Wanderer78 wrote: »

critical point, hence the importance of this issue

And of course at nearly every HSE fcuk up it's throw the hands up in the air and ah shur God love them, but what can we do? Ah shur no-one is accountable and so on.

And it goes away until the next fcuk up, and the next...

_Puma_ · 03-05-2018 10:31AM

If anything the OP just exposes the dregs of humanity our society has been producing lately. Our country is full of these little individuals and more and more we see them walking the corridors of power, the more we have these scandals.

Amirani · 03-05-2018 11:23AM

McCrack wrote: »

No I get that they should where appropriate defend claims however and particularly with medical negligence cases they deny liability until the Plaintiff is forced into Court to open their case

Ive seen it many times

In my view it should really be a court that is deciding on significant financial payouts for the State. Vickie Phelan for example; I'd not be in favour of a situation whereby a civil servant can unilaterally award a €2.5m payout to a claimant, it makes much more sense to have a judge make the decision with the a balanced unbiased view of the facts.

Obviously it should be dealt with as sensitively and as quickly as possible to minimise the impact on the victim.

McCrack · 03-05-2018 11:28AM

Amirani wrote: »

In my view it should really be a court that is deciding on significant financial payouts for the State. Vickie Phelan for example; I'd not be in favour of a situation whereby a civil servant can unilaterally award a €2.5m payout to a claimant, it makes much more sense to have a judge make the decision with the a balanced unbiased view of the facts.

Obviously it should be dealt with as sensitively and as quickly as possible to minimise the impact on the victim.

The State Claims Agency instruct their own solicitors/Senior Counsel who are experienced and well capable of deciding issues of liability and quantum

Its not usually necessary to have a Judge decide these issues yet time and time again people are forced into the High Court for the defendants to turn around after day one or day two of trial to offer settlement which could have/should have been done before the case got near the steps of Court

Squatter · 03-05-2018 01:03PM

McCrack wrote: »

The State Claims Agency instruct their own solicitors/Senior Counsel who are experienced and well capable of deciding issues of liability and quantum

Its not usually necessary to have a Judge decide these issues yet time and time again people are forced into the High Court for the defendants to turn around after day one or day two of trial to offer settlement which could have/should have been done before the case got near the steps of Court

Of course a thing is that we never get to hear is whether the plaintiffs' well paid counsel have been playing silly buggers until the last moment in order to increase their fees.

jmayo · 03-05-2018 05:33PM

JMNolan wrote: »

Oh, is this a new step? Naming people? Perhaps we should look for their home addresses too? Family members perhaps? Why shouldn't the state claims agency defend claims? Are you so blinkered that you think they should pay out on every claim simply based on gender?

Well if that person was a party to dragging a very sick terminally ill woman into court, forcing her to take the stand for a couple of hours and forcing her to very invasive questioning, forcing her to provide witnesses, and then folding their case the very next day.

They knew they had no case, but yet they persisted.

Well fook him he and all the other bast**ds that were a party to that plan of attack and they can face the glare of publicity.

Or maybe you would like them hidden away like they tried to do with the plaintiff so none of this sad inept saga would reach the light of day. :rolleyes:

If anything all the people responsible for the handling of this whole saga should be named and shamed.
I am tired of people hiding behind the systemic shtye.

Wanderer78 wrote: »

fair point, but the workings of our health systems is a far more complex beast, im not convinced any country knows how to truly run one

Well a lot of countries make a better fist of it than us.

Squatter wrote: »

Sometimes it's a shame and other times it's a necessary evil.

You and others may want the SCA to function as an ATM, but I don't.

No one is demanding it be made an ATM but fair is fair.
This woman is facing unnecessary death.

Squatter wrote: »

Of course a thing is that we never get to hear is whether the plaintiffs' well paid counsel have been playing silly buggers until the last moment in order to increase their fees.

Trust me it wasn't that in this case.
Witnesses were contacted at very short notice to appear because this case was pushed through quickly because of the prognosis for the plaintiff.

But that didn't stop the SCA from trying to put her through the ringer.

Ipso · 03-05-2018 05:46PM

_Puma_ wrote: »

If anything the OP just exposes the dregs of humanity our society has been producing lately. Our country is full of these little individuals and more and more we see them walking the corridors of power, the more we have these scandals.

It also exposes the system and culture that the Irish electorate votes for.

Squatter · 03-05-2018 07:13PM

jmayo wrote: »

No one is demanding it be made an ATM but fair is fair.
This woman is facing unnecessary death.

I wasn't referring specifically to "this woman" I was responding to the general point that marzic had made.

jluv · 03-05-2018 07:14PM

iamwhoiam wrote: »

I am trying to piece the timeline together . Did someone know that Vicky Phelan had an abnormal smear test result and not inform her of that for a period of time ? Or was her abnormal smear test not diagnosed ?

From what I've seen and read. Her 2011 smear came back negative.In 2014 she was experiencing symptoms. While at doctors/hospital she read her file which said that the 2011 smear was a false negative but she hadn't been informed.She told her story on Ray Darcy last Sat night if you have player.
Knowing now how active/proactive a person she is,I feel had she been informed of the false negative sooner then she would have had a better fighting chance.
She herself seems to be encouraging women to continue having cervical checks and that false negatives can occur.In fact she reckons that there was never a better time to have one in this country as no information will be withheld due to the high lighting of her case.

tretorn · 03-05-2018 07:46PM

As I understand it though her test was re examined after she developed cervical cancer, this is normal in all cases where a woman develops cervical cancer after getting the all clear.

No one hid the fact that the cancer had been missed between 2011 and 2014, no one was aware it had been missed until she developed cancer of the cervix. I really dont believe any health board official would hide the fact that someones test was incorrect, they would immediately contact the person and do another smear test and then if a treatment plan was needed the patient would be looked after properly.

I could have a colonoscopy now and be told I am cancer free. I can continue on with my life but develop bowel cancer within six months.If someone was to review the colonoscopy results they may find there was cancer, this doesnt mean anyone is responsible for giving me cancer and I have to accept that humans make errors and some errors cost people their lives.

Is this not basically what happened here.

iamwhoiam · 03-05-2018 07:47PM

jluv wrote: »

From what I've seen and read. Her 2011 smear came back negative.In 2014 she was experiencing symptoms. While at doctors/hospital she read her file which said that the 2011 smear was a false negative but she hadn't been informed.She told her story on Ray Darcy last Sat night if you have player.
Knowing now how active/proactive a person she is,I feel had she been informed of the false negative sooner then she would have had a better fighting chance.
She herself seems to be encouraging women to continue having cervical checks and that false negatives can occur.In fact she reckons that there was never a better time to have one in this country as no information will be withheld due to the high lighting of her case.

Thank you very much . I was confused if they knew her 2011 smear test was a false negative before her 2014 symptoms .

Smear Test Scandal

Comments