Gail Robinson isn't angry anymore, she says she's past it and she needs to have a positive attitude to see her through her impending court case. She is one of about a dozen people in the North who intend to take court action against the authorities after they contracted hepatitis C from blood transfusions.
Gail believes she was infected with the disease when she had a miscarriage in 1989.
"I hadn't been well for a couple of years, I was running to the doctor loads. I began to suffer from headaches, joint pains. I was very tired."
It was as a result of a routine blood test that "by sheer fluke or accident they found out I had hepatitis C, which I'd never heard of."
Further investigation showed she had severe damage to her liver which worsened over three years until she was put on the transplant list.
Soon after her transplant in 1999, she rejected the liver she had been given. "I had only two hours to get another liver, and they can't order those," she said.
Fortunately, one became available and after 14-hour and 10-hour operations the transplant was successful.
But it was not without cost. During the procedures the nerves to her right foot were irrevocably damaged, leaving it inert, while the anti-rejection drugs have left her diabetic. She also fears the drugs have slowed her thought processes.
Gail (50), who lives near Downpatrick, Co Down, is the only one of those hoping to sue who was willing to speak to the media, an indication of the stigma that some still attach to the disease.
People in Northern Ireland with the disease have high hopes of receiving compensation after a series of test cases in England and Wales.
In six cases decided late last month, a High Court judge in London awarded between £10,000 and £210,000 sterling.
The judge ruled a total of 114 claimants were entitled to compensation under the British Consumer Protection Act, which makes producers and suppliers of defective products liable even if they were not negligent.
The claimants had transfusions after March 1st, 1988, when the Act came into force. In May 1988 hepatitis C was identified. Before that it was thought that an unidentified virus was causing the symptoms, particularly after transfusions. Screening for hepatitis C was not introduced in Britain until September 1991.
Mr Justice Burton said that blood contaminated with hepatitis C was defective, and anyone who caught the virus as a result was entitled to compensation because the NHS knew about the risk.
A spokesperson for the Department of Health in Northern Ireland said they could not comment on the ramifications of the English case as the authorities were still considering an appeal.
The circumstances of one of the test cases would seem to bear many similarities to Gail Robinson's.
A woman in her mid-50s, who had been infected by a blood transfusion during routine surgery, received the largest award. Medication for hepatitis C had failed and she also underwent a liver transplant. Her total award, including compensation for financial losses while she was ill, was £210,000 sterling.
All those receiving compensation may be eligible for further compensation if they become ill again. Ms Robinson says she never blamed anyone for her misfortune, but felt "angry at the system, angry at the way it happened".
"My life has changed wildly. I was very vivacious, full of energy, charging about the place. I have slowed down a lot. I'm still very tired. That's nearly two years after the transplant."
Her anger has passed. "You have to deal with it," she says. "But it has changed a number of people's lives . . . I think there should be an inquiry."
DUP Assembly member Ms Iris Robinson, who is not related to Gail, has tabled a question to the Health Minister, Ms Bairbre de Brun, asking what plans she has to pay compensation to haemophiliacs and others who got hepatitis C from blood transfusions.
She said she would be asking Ms de Brun to make appropriate compensation and to intervene rather than go through lengthy court action when the outcome should be the same as that in Britain.
Mr Martin Hughes, chief executive of the British Liver Trust, said since last month's verdict more potential claimants had emerged who might be eligible.
Gail Robinson also believes more claimants may exist. "I feel everyone who had a blood product or a transfusion between 1985 and 1991 should get themselves tested."