Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 1 Feb 1978

Vol. 303 No. 2

Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Whooping Cough.

19.

asked the Minister for Health if he has seen a report of the massive increase in the numbers of admissions of whooping cough cases to Clonskeagh Fever Hospital, Dublin; and if, in the light of this, he is satisfied that the immunisation campaign carried out by his Department is adequate.

I have seen the report to which the Deputy refers and indeed I should say that I am aware of the increased incidence of whooping cough in the community generally in 1977.

The availability of a vaccination against this disease is widely known and the service for giving it widely publicised. There has been, as the Deputy knows, considerable controversy about this particular vaccine which has obviously had its effect on the uptake of the vaccination and, in that context, I have been advised that efforts to advocate it to parents by way of an advertising campaign would be likely to be counter-productive. Nevertheless, it remains a recommended preventive medical procedure by my Department where no contra-indications exist in individual cases and, in the last analysis, it must remain to parents to decide whether they will avail themselves of the procedure after the necessary medical consultation or not.

In view of the fact that there is considerable public concern and fear about having children vaccinated against whooping cough, would the Minister's Department consider initiating a programme of public education to explain the incidence of brain damage post-whooping cough vaccination and the dangers of whooping cough itself? If the Minister were to initiate this programme of public education and also give an assurance to the parents that, where there were contra indications, there would be no pressure on them——

The Deputy is making a statement.

I am not making a statement. I am asking the Minister if he would make a recommendation. That is very different from making a statement. I am asking the Minister to have his Department issue a statement to the effect that, in specific cases where there would be a danger, they would advise against vaccination and in this way they would allay public suspicion and encourage greater participation in the programme. Will the Minister consider that?

I will certainly consider it, but the Deputy must realise I am advised there is considerable danger in a campaign of that sort. It can have contra effects. This has been the experience in Britain.

The Minister and his predecessors have always been advised, but they have been advised wrongly as we have seen from the thalidomide disaster. Could the Minister look at it himself? Some time the Minister might forget his advisers and he might get a better plan. The Minister knows the record of his advisers in the thalidomide disaster. Criminal charges should be preferred against some of them.

There is great doubt about the risks involved in the injection of this vaccine. What is the Minister's attitude to the indemnification of a medical officer working for the health authority who may have an action for compensation taken against him in such circumstances?

That is an entirely separate question.

What we do there is advise and insist that all those involved take out the necessary insurance.

Where they are working for the health board would the health board be liable?

They take out insurance themselves.

That is not very encouraging.

The Deputy refuses to be encouraged about anything I say, so we will just have to leave it at that, will we not?

The Minister cannot blame me for that.

Top
Share