‘State reneged on probe into barbaric pelvic op’

MOTHERS who underwent symphysiotomies have accused the Department of Health of reneging on a promise to have the controversial procedure investigated.

In October 2003, the then Health Minister, Micheál Martin, promised an external review of the practice of symphysiotomy, saying it would be led by an international obstetrician.

The review was one of a number of measures he announced after a meeting with the Survivors of Symphysiotomy (SOS) group, which represents hundreds of women who were subjected to the procedure between the 1950s and early 1980s.

But almost two years on the department has failed to appoint an obstetrician to lead the review, which now looks unlikely.

“We can’t say if it will definitely go ahead or not,” the department said.

The operation, the aim of which is to widen the pelvis in cases of obstructed labour so that a baby can be delivered, involves surgeons slicing through cartilage to separate the two pubic bones.

But long-term risks include urethral and bladder injury, infection, pain and long-term walking difficulty. The World Health Organisation recommends its use “only when there is no safe alternative”.

There have been strong suggestions that Irish maternity hospitals used the procedure as an alternative to Caesarean sections because of the influence of the Catholic Church, which believed the latter could have encouraged women to use contraceptives.

Many members of SOS say the procedure was performed without their consent and that they were not told about it afterwards.

They subsequently suffered from a range of conditions, including chronic back pain, lack of mobility, and incontinence.

SOS originally wanted a sworn, public inquiry into the procedure, which they denounce as barbaric, but settled for the external review as a “first step”.

The department did source one expert, a Scandinavian obstetrician, who it felt could lead the review. But SOS objected.

“They did find somebody, who thought symphysiotomy was the best thing since sliced bread,” an SOS spokesperson said. “They wanted to find somebody who favoured it. Our members created uproar, and managed to block it.”

The department has failed to find an alternative. “Due to the difficulties in engaging an expert from abroad to advise on the practice, we can’t categorically say [the review] will go ahead at this point,” the department spokesperson said.