Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 7 Nov 2000

Vol. 525 No. 2

Written Answers. - Health Board Correspondence.

John McGuinness

Question:

445 Mr. McGuinness asked the Minister for Health and Children if, further to Parliamentary Question No. 574 of 3 October 2000, he will have investigations made into the reply by the South Eastern Health Board regarding a person (details supplied) in County Carlow, who was also a subject of a previous parliamentary question and was waiting to have a cataract removed; his views on whether the reply was misleading in view of the fact that it stated that the patient was admitted on 10 October 2000, had her cataract removed and was later seen by the outpatients' department, but failed to address the most significant point, namely, that the cataract was removed as a private patient; the reason a date earlier than March 2001 was not given to her as a public patient in view of her condition; if he has satisfied himself with the response from the South Eastern Health Board; the steps he will take to rectify the situation; his views on whether his Department or South Eastern Health Board should compensate the family and cover the cost of the operation; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [24020/00]

Minister for Health and Children (Mr. Martin):

I understand from the South Eastern Health Board that the board is satisfied that the facts were correct in the reply issued to Parliamentary Question No. 574. The Deputy did not ask for the status of the patient, that is, public or private. The consultant's common contract allows for patients to be seen as public or private patients and it is a matter for patients which option to choose. The person in this case chose to be treated privately and was admitted under the care of an ophthalmic surgeon on 10 September 2000.