Vol. 541 No. 2
518 Mr. Perry asked the Minister for Health and Children if his attention has been drawn to the reported decision by the Medical Defence Union to raise the subscription levels for obstetricians and gynaecologists here; the reason for this decision; the implications this decision will have; and if he will make he will make a statement on the matter. [21772/01]
I was made aware some months ago of the intention of the Medical Defence Union to raise the subscription charged to their Irish obstetrician members from £68,600, 87,104, to £393,000, 499,007. The Medical Defence Union has attributed the scale of this increase to the size of awards and settlements made in cases involving brain-damaged infants. I am concerned that such an enormous increase has been proposed but I am satisfied that in itself it has no major implications for the delivery of obstetric services in Ireland as cover remains available from the other mutual defence body, the Medical Protection Society at a rate of £52,000, 66,026.
519 Mr. Perry asked the Minister for Health and Children the basis on which one medical defence organisation can charge obstetricians and gynaecologists £393,000, while a second medical defence organisation proposes to charge £51,600; the steps he is taking to ensure that the subscription rates being charged by the medical defence organisations for obstetric and gynaecological claims are sustainable and adequate to cover liabilities and costs in the context of the high level of obstetric claims; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [21773/01]
The settling of appropriate subscription rates for medical indemnity cover is a matter for the medical defence bodies. The Medical Defence Union and the Medical Protection Society are mutual defence bodies responsible to their own members. In recent months they have both explained the basis on which they arrived at their respective rates for covering Irish obstetricians. These appear to be influenced by differential claims experiences, different approaches to reserving to meet the cost of future claims and to the degree to which each attempts to allocate the cost of meeting obstetric claims across other specialties. Increases in the cost of providing cover for obstetrics highlights the difficulties inherent in the present indemnity arrangements. These are not confined to this specialty. I hope to be in a position to take further more detailed proposals on the introduction of enterprise liability to Government in the coming weeks.
The group established to examine the feasibility of introducing a "no fault" compensation system for infants who suffer brain damage at birth has begun its work and hopes to be in a position to submit at least an interim report on its deliberations in the middle of next year.
Question No. 520 answered with Question No. 426.
