.jpg)
I was outraged by their personal stories of pain and abuse and moved by their courage and resilience. In the years since then the campaign has increased pressure on the government to address this issue in a way that is satisfactory to the remaining women survivors. As part of Sinn Féin’s efforts we have raised this issue in the Dáil and in the media but we also saw the value in raising this issue internationally.
As part of
this I introduced some victims of symphysiotomy to Professor Irene Anne Jillson
PhD. Irene has an international reputation in global health generally and in women’s
health. She and four graduate nursing students voluntarily undertook a study of
symphysiotomy, even paying their own travel and other expenses.
Today has
seen the publication of their report by the prestigious School of Nursing and
Health Studies at Georgetown University. Symphysiotomy in Ireland: A
Qualitative Study’ makes grim reading. It is a detailed expose of the cruel and
inhuman use of Symphysiotomy on women in Ireland.
The focus of
the study was to explore ‘the factors
that contributed to the use of Symphysiotomy’ in Ireland from 1944 to 1984
and to examine the impact it had on the women victims. Unusually the study also
spoke to the husbands of women who had suffered Symphysiotomy and heard from
them for the first time of the trauma of this practice on their wives and
families.
The report
also reveals that the procedure was often carried out without a women’s ‘understanding or consent. Most of the 1500
or more Irish women on whom symphysiotomies had been performed and who were
alive in 1999, learned for the first time in that year, that the procedure had
been performed on them, as a result of a newspaper article based on a doctoral
thesis.’
Professor
Jillson and two colleagues carried out exhaustive interviews with participants
who in the main are between 60-80 years of age and live in Louth. The report
records their experience and in their own words details their lack of consent
to symphysiotomy and the lack of
information available to them. Professor Jillson notes that ‘most women in the study reported that they
had either never heard of the procedure or didn’t know what the procedure was
at the time of their delivery … Doctors rarely gave an explanation of what they
were doing before or during the procedure.’
And even
after the procedure many women didn’t know what had been done to them.
The report pulls no punches in describing the
pain that the women experienced. It reports that: ‘The physical distress
following the symphysiotomy procedure was significant for nearly every woman
interviewed. Women consistently reported chronic pain, fatigue, urinary tract
infections, incontinence, difficulty walking, limited mobility, and pain during
sexual intercourse. Many are confined to wheelchairs and/or have to walk with
the assistance of a cane or walker. With regard to incontinence, one woman
described continued problems with incontinence, which is both embarrassing and
inconvenient. In describing her lack of bowel control, one woman shared, “I had
no muscular control…It felt like a herd of elephants had walked all over me
body.”
Pain pervaded the daily lives of many of the participants, altering the amount they could work and the amount of energy they had to carry out activities of daily living. Back pain was a persistent problem that limited the mobility of many of the women, and continues to do so.’
When asked
what they now wanted most women said they wanted an explanation, transparency
and an apology from those involved.
The
experience of victims of symphysiotomy
is expressed tellingly by one respondent who describes symphysiotomy as evil.
She said: ‘One word: evil. Pure evil.
It’s like a witch doctor participated in the abuse of women’s bodies. That’s
what I feel.’ Another described it as ‘a
curse one would not wish on my worst enemy.’
Recently the
Minister for Health James Reilly refused to publish the second part of the
report into symphysiotomy by Professor Oonagh Walsh. The Minister said he didn’t
want to publish it until after the government has reached its decision on this
issue.
This isn’t
good enough. The victims, their families and supporters have a right to see all
of the available information about the use of symphysiotomy and its effect on
the women and their husbands and families.
There are
only around 200 survivors alive. They are all very elderly and carry deep physical
and emotional scars from their experience. Some are quite frail. They simply
cannot afford to wait months or longer for justice. Time is therefore of the
essence.
The Ministers claim that it is ‘open to any woman not wishing to pursue mediation to bring a claim through the courts’ ignores the fact that many of the women cannot do this because of the Statue of Limitations.
In April the Government supported the Statute of Limitations (Amendment)
Bill 2013, introduced by Caoimhghín O Caoláin TD, which seeks to accommodate
access to the courts for all victims of symphysiotomy who would choose that
course of action. However the government is preventing further progress on
this.
The process of securing justice for these women victims is very important. The government is adding to the stress on victims and is ignoring the Dáil, by refusing to publish the Walsh report.
The process of securing justice for these women victims is very important. The government is adding to the stress on victims and is ignoring the Dáil, by refusing to publish the Walsh report.
The victims of symphysiotomy must have the
right to decide which course of action is best for them in their efforts to
secure justice and compensation. To do that the government must publish the
Walsh report; the terms of reference for the Judge and mediation process; a
fixed and short timeframe for this process to take place and assist the passage
of the Statute of Limitations (Amendment) Bill 2013.
The report by Professor Jillson is a welcome addition to the body of
medical evidence and information now available.
Comments