Report on symphysiotomy a whitewash and insult to victims
SYMPHYSIOTOMY is Bridget McCole multiplied by 200 — Finance Minister Michael Noonan should take note.
Three generations of women likely had their lives destroyed by this pelvis-cutting operation, which was carried out in hospitals overseen by the State. Of the 1,500 mothers who were mutilated in this way, about 200 survive today. The eldest is 91, the youngest 47.
This dangerous 18th-century childbirth operation, which unhinged the pelvis, was performed in Ireland from the 1940s onwards in certain cases in preference to caesarean section. The reasons were almost always non-medical, a mix of personal ideology — hostility to birth control — medical training, and patient experimentation. Survivors have been fighting for truth and justice for 10 years. Yet still the Government refuses to acknowledge their legitimate demands.
Two weeks ago, the Department of Health released a whitewash report that stands over almost all of these unjustified and unjustifiable operations. The Walsh report found — wrongly in my view — that symphysiotomy was “safer” than caesarean sections, and that these operations were mainly “emergencies”.
The document also raises the suggestion that symphysiotomy was necessary because mothers were malnourished and had deformed pelvises. On the back of these and other baseless findings, the report concluded that only those symphysiotomies performed after caesarean section — a tiny number — were wrong. This conclusion provides no basis for truth or redress for about 97% of the casualties still living.
Had the author spoken first to survivors, she could not have reached these key conclusions. Caesarean sections did not leave women with walking difficulties, incontinence, chronic pain, neurological conditions, depression, or post-traumatic stress disorder for 30, 40, 50, or 60 years.
Even this litany of ill health does not tell the full story. One survivor has been unable to take a bath since the operation, because her back was so badly injured by the surgery. Catastrophic bladder injuries have prevented another from ever taking a holiday. A third, who loved dancing, has never danced since.
But it is no accident that the terms of reference excluded survivor testimony: No findings could then be made on their injuries.
When Survivors of Symphysiotomy (SoS), the sole membership group for casualties of this surgery nationwide, asked the department two years ago to set up an independent inquiry, they were passed over to the Institute of Obstetricians. When SoS asked the institute to medically assess members’ injuries and systematically document their experiences, it indicated that it wished to hear their “stories”.
The Walsh Report Part Two — the so-called consultation exercise being run by the department — fulfils the institute’s desire for storytelling, just as the Walsh Report Part One harks back to the terms of reference drawn up by the institute in 2010 for its own “review” — later abandoned — of symphysiotomy.
Comparisons have been made between the Harding Clark inquiry and the Walsh Report Part Two, but these are false. When women who had been sterilised without their knowledge or consent spoke to Judge Maureen Harding Clark, they were giving evidence to an independent inquiry, headed by a member of the judiciary and supported by a full legal team, which heard 268 witnesses. The Walsh Report Part Two aims to meet and greet — three minutes each — about 180 survivors in nine hours.
SoS is to its own independent consultation on the Walsh report and not to take any other part in an exercise that would put a gloss on a report that Independent TD Stephen Donnelly said should be binned.
Survivors will not give the authorities their “stories” to enable them to weave a web — relegating women’s injuries to “complications” — that justifies these barbarous operations.
They will keep their testimony for forums that are free of the control and influence of those who hide the truth about this pelvis-breaking surgery. Also, survivors’ voices are highly unlikely to change the Walsh findings. In line with the defective terms of reference, these findings were based on published material that presents these operations in a good light, and do not depend on survivors’ views or experiences, which were formally excluded.
The joint Oireachtas committee on justice recently backed SoS’s request for the statute of limitations to be set aside for 12 months. The health minister should now announce his support for the justice committee’s call, so all survivors can get to first base in the courts, without lengthy, expensive battles over time-based barriers.
The courts represent the only forum there is for truth and justice. It is past time for truth and justice, not tea and sympathy.
* Marie O’Connor is chairwoman of Survivors of Symphysiotomy
CONNECT WITH US TODAY
Be the first to know the latest news and updates
