Vol. 519 No. 6
90 Mr. Connaughton asked the Minister for Health and Children to detail the communications, if any, he has had with Our Lady's Hospital for Sick Children in Crumlin concerning its alleged breaches of the Coroners Act, 1962; and the response to date received by him from the hospital in this regard. [14053/00]
140 Mr. Shatter asked the Minister for Health and Children the communications, if any, he has had with Our Lady's Hospital for Sick Children in Crumlin concerning its alleged breaches of the Coroners Act, 1962; and the response to date received by him from the hospital in this regard. [14396/00]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 90 and 140 together.
Section 18(4) of the Coroners Act, 1962, inter alia, provides that “every medical practitioner who has reason to believe that the deceased person died, whether directly or indirectly from any reason other than natural illness or disease for which he had been seen and treated by a registered medical practitioner within one month before his death, or in such circumstances as may require investigation, including death as the result of the administration of an anaesthetic, shall immediately notify the Coroner within whose district the body is of the fact and circumstances relating to the death”.
Following an inquiry from my Department on 9 March 2000, Our Lady's Hospital for Sick Children informed my Department that its practice in relation to deaths of patients recognises the legal duty in certain circumstances to notify the coroner. At that time the hospital undertook a review of the post mortem examination cases on which the alleged breaches of the Coroners Act, 1962, were based. The hospital has since provided my Department with a written submission on this review. The submission also outlines the hospital's understanding of the Coroner's Act, 1962, and the Birth and Death Registration Act, 1880; the hospital's policy and practice in relation to this matter; and a random review of deaths necessitating contact with the coroner.
It is my opinion that these cases, and any other similar cases, would fall within the terms of reference of the inquiry which I recently announced. Consequently, I do not consider it appropriate to make any further comment on the matter at this stage. I trust the Deputy will appreciate the view that the independence of the Inquiry is of critical importance and must be respected as such.
I am aware of additional trauma and distress caused to parents as a result of these matters and I am confident that the inquiry will ensure that parents will be satisfied that the full facts of all of the issues involved will be established.
