Women were promised they would be spared this harsh legal trauma

WOMEN at the centre of the CervicalCheck scandal, some of whom are extremely ill, were promised they would not have to endure any court trauma.

The pledges were made by the Taoiseach Leo Varadkar and Health Minister Simon Harris (inset), both of whom belatedly realised the fear and panic spreading around the country as the scandal escalated.

They also underestimated public outcry at the failure to ensure women who developed cervical cancer were told of internal CervicalCheck audits.

But the public will be dismayed by the aggressive approach taken against Emma Mhic Mhathúna, a mother of five who has terminal cancer.

Why is the HSE refusing to admit liability? And why is it allowing the legal team for Quest Diagnostics, the US lab where the mistake was made, to take the lead in a manner people would see as quite hostile? It seems they are applying the normal rules of legal combat with little concession to the tragic and highly sensitive circumstances of the case.

The message also seems to be that other women who take legal cases can expect the same confrontational approach and will have to prove their case, involving securing documentation, external reports and other testimonies.

Even if the Government sets up a redress scheme, the case of each woman will have to undergo the rigours of proof. The terms and conditions of this proposed redress scheme have yet to be drawn up and a decision on whether to set one up will only be made after a scoping inquiry report is completed in late June. Previous redress schemes have met with a mixed reaction from claimants in cases of Hepatitis C infection and other scandals. Levels of payouts and eligibility criteria in these State schemes are inevitably criticised as being too restrictive.

It remains to be seen how generous a scheme for women who developed cervical cancer after an incorrect test will be and it is likely several will still have to go to court to secure financial provision for the young children they may leave behind.

Compensation will only likely be paid to women who can prove a mistake was made in reading their test.

Others will also have suffered a misdiagnosis and had a wrong test result, going on to develop cancer.

However, if the incorrect result was due to a failure of the test and is deemed an “acceptable miss” due to the limitations of the test, the chances of compensation are low.

At any rate the State is set to have a huge litigation bill.

The State Claims Agency said yesterday it was managing Ms Mhic Mhathúna’s case “as expeditiously as possible” and was “committed to progressing this case rapidly and in compliance with the strict timelines imposed by the court”.

It has “informed the court it will do everything in its power to bring about the resolution of this case by mediation and is working expeditiously towards that end”.

It insisted it was working co-operatively with the co-defendant laboratories, utilising mediation as an alternative to a formal court hearing, treating Ms Mhic Mhathúna and her family with dignity and compassion.

For Ms Mhic Mhathúna and her family the end of this court fight cannot come soon enough.

But other women must be forewarned of what may lie ahead for them.