Hospitals start investigations into post-mortem practices in infant cases

Two Dublin hospitals have started internal investigations into their post-mortem practices as a result of the organ retention…

Two Dublin hospitals have started internal investigations into their post-mortem practices as a result of the organ retention controversy.

St James's Hospital confirmed yesterday it had ordered a review of its practices for handling of the remains of infants and foetuses at its former maternity unit. The period of review will extend from 1971, when the hospital was constituted in its present form, to September 1987, when the maternity unit was transferred to the Coombe Hospital.

The review will be conducted by Prof John Bonnar, emeritus professor of obstetrics and gynaecology, who previously worked at the hospital, and St James's former chief executive, Mr Liam Dunbar. They have been asked to report to the chief executive within a month. Their report will be made public.

Our Lady's Hospital, Crumlin, is to carry out its own investigation into allegations that it failed to report to the coroner the deaths under anaesthetic of two children.

READ MORE

In the case of one child who died in 1994 while undergoing surgery, the Dublin City Coroner has written to the family confirming that there is no record of contact between the Crumlin hospital and the coroner's office following the child's death. A post-mortem examination was carried out "in house", and some of the child's organs were subsequently retained.

The Parents for Justice Group brought the issue to the attention of the Minister for Health at a meeting last Thursday. During the meeting, the possibility of a breach of the 1962 Coroners Act was discussed. The Irish Times understands that the advice of the Attorney General has been sought on the matter.

The 1962 Act requires that the fact and circumstances relating to an anaesthetic death be reported to the coroner, either directly, or indirectly via a member of the Garda not below the rank of sergeant. Failure to comply with this requirement is an offence, with a maximum fine of £20 payable on summary conviction.

The hospital's chief executive, Mr Paul Kavanagh, said it accepted its obligations under the Coroners Act. This required notification by medical staff to the coroner in certain circumstances. This notification was frequently effected by telephone, he said.

"The hospital is urgently endeavouring to establish if any written record exists of contact with the coroner following these deaths in 1985 and 1994," Mr Kavanagh said. "It is concerned at the statement that it has been established that the hospital has failed to meet its obligations under the Act and has sought information with respect to the basis for that statement."

Where a coroner is informed of a death he may instruct that a post-mortem examination be carried out, Mr Kavanagh noted. "In this hospital, prior to mid-1995, it was not common practice to maintain written records of telephone contact by medical staff," he said.

Since 1995 the hospital management initiated procedural change which required confirmation of a record of contact with the coroner.

A spokeswoman for the Parents for Justice Group said this week's meeting with the Minister was "most productive". There was agreement on the need for the forthcoming inquiry to ensure "compellability of evidence" while ensuring the right of individuals to anonymity. The Minister told the group that all matters relating to coroners' practice would be included in the inquiry.