Sir, – Mr Justice Frank Clarke’s call for a rights-based compensation scheme for victims of crime echoes down the corridors of hospitals where we too await radical reform in how compensation is approached (“It’s time for a compensation scheme that recognises the pain and suffering of victims,” Opinion, April 9th).
Despite the establishment of the State Claims Agency in 2000, and more recent recommendations from the Interdepartmental Working Group on the Rising Cost of Health-related Claims, we continue to see families outside the High Court pleading for acknowledgement and compensation.
Forced to fight to secure funding for care after life-changing outcomes from medical treatment or payment of solatium after unanticipated death, as there is no other pathway to resolution.This is never more distressing than the struggle endured by families harmed through misdiagnosis or parents of a baby with severe cerebral palsy after birth.
Eventually, substantial settlements are approved by the court to secure their future care. Behind each settlement is a nonsensical, lengthy battle to access records and the retraumatising effect of recounting their story over and again.
READ MORE
Intimate details of family life are reduced to expert opinions and the indignity of cold financial calculations, with cases often heard in public. Keeping medical cases out of the Personal Injuries Resolution Board was a missed opportunity.
Healthcare claims were deemed too complex and too contested to be adequately provided for under a scheme designed to promote early resolution and fair compensation.
It was believed a patient’s fight for justice was different than with other forms of harm. This pitting of patients against the system has been a mistake.
Instead of working together to understand and learn from poor outcomes, the system defends, and the patient must pursue.
Years spent petitioning for healthcare information and compensation through a multitude of legal procedures does not deliver justice or reduce psychological harm.
Who gains from the cruel and repeated denial of liability that adversarial litigation fosters? Not the patient, their family, the healthcare team or the overall health system.
Contrast this with New Zealand’s no-fault compensation scheme which allows patients to receive government-funded compensation for medical injuries without the need for malpractice litigation, promoting a simpler and more accessible process. Their scheme is noted for its affordability and efficiency in processing claims.
We have not one, but two State-funded bodies, the State Claims Agency and the Personal Injuries Resolution Board – but neither compensates patients without the toll of litigation.
Even mediation is often at the direction of the courts.
We are not lacking in reports and recommendations on fair and accessible compensation; nor are we lacking in successful models in other countries which fund lifelong care for those harmed.
What Justice Clarke and the Law Reform Commission may discover is that it is the necessary courage and action that is sorely missing. – Yours, etc,
DR SUZANNE CROWE,
Consultant in paediatric
intensive care medicine,
Ranelagh,
Dublin 6.
Fuel protests and division
Sir, – It’s hard to avoid coverage on the fuel protests, not just by media, but everywhere in daily life including neighbourhood WhatsApp groups, colleagues and random people on your commute.
What seems different now compared to previous times is the divisiveness and how any nuance on the protests, the way in which they are carried out or the impact they’ve had on people’s lives is treated in very black and white terms and not tolerated. Either side will condemn the other as wilfully ignorant for daring to express a diverging opinion.
One of the things I loved about Ireland moving here was the “live and let live” attitude of people. I hope that is not disappearing with the clear rise of polarisation in social discourse.
While it is encouraging to see people come together in support during difficult times and stand up for policy change, I hope it does not come at the cost of shutting down respectful disagreement. – Yours, etc,
PETER ELST,
Donabate,
Dublin.
Sir, – As I read your editorial, “The Irish Times view on the fuel protests: patience is running out.” (April 11th), it occurred to me how perspectives can differ wildly.
Your view seems to want to lay the blame for all the disruption at the feet of those protesting.
No mention at all of the real culprits. the Trump and Netanyahu regimes that launched an unprovoked attack on Iran, not to mention a sitting Government that simply refuses to address its many failures; particularly in the area of the provision of access for the many to social goods such as healthcare, housing, education etc. Purely from this latter vista, what I see within the mayhem is a population beginning to vent its anger. – Yours, etc,
JIM O’SULLIVAN,
Rathedmond,
Sligo.
Sir, – I wonder if our “heroic” blockaders will show as much enthusiasm for disruption at the Irish Open to be held at Trump International Golf Links in Doonbeg later in the year, given Trump is the real author of the fuel crisis. – Yours, etc,
KIERAN RIGBY,
Newbridge,
Co Kildare.
Sir, – Irish farmers face genuine costs. Fuel costs have risen by as much as 50 per cent in the weeks since the start of the US/Israeli war on Iran. Energy and fuel prices were already among the highest in Europe, a structural issue that affects every business and household in Ireland, farming included.
What doesn’t survive scrutiny is the food security myth, the idea that Irish farmers are a special case because they put food on the table.
Approximately 90 per cent of Irish beef, sheepmeat and dairy is exported each year, with Britain and the EU as the principal markets. Ireland imports the great majority of the food its people actually eat. The farming lobby as guarantor of Irish food security is a political fiction.
The environmental record sits awkwardly alongside the national service narrative.
Agriculture accounts for over a third of Ireland’s greenhouse gas emissions, and the EPA has repeatedly identified it as a major source of pressure on water quality. These are not contested figures.
Farmers receive very substantial support through EU CAP payments and State schemes such as ACRES and TAMS.
The public is entitled to ask what it gets in return. “Feeding the nation” is not an honest answer to that question. – Yours, etc,
DAVID CAMPBELL,
Co Donegal.
On your bike
Sir, – There is a sense of national grievance about the negative impact of the Middle East crisis on our disposable income because of increased fuel costs. Even with the good intentions of people to get more exercise by cycling, it is probable that for many, their bikes remain relatively unused in locked sheds in back gardens.
These bikes could be used by some people to commute to work. By adding panniers, it may be possible to cycle to the supermarket for groceries.
We need to adapt and become more resilient in how we respond to rising petrol and diesel prices. Greater adoption of cycling is an obvious way to reduce your transport costs and improve fitness. – Yours, etc,
MARK FOX,
Dublin 18.
Standing up for children
Sir, – It struck me this morning, listening to news reports of protests taking place across Ireland, just how powerful collective action can be. When necessary, we have shown that we can disrupt daily life. We’ve closed hospitals, halted airports, blocked roads to ensure our voices heard. Right or wrong, we know, some issues demand urgency and visibility.
And yet, when it comes to the quiet but profound harm being done to our children, targeted by algorithms, their attention commodified, their mental health steadily eroded for some reason we respond very differently. We take to the very same platforms driving this damage to express concern, to share articles, to debate. But we stop there.
Why is that?
If we truly believe this is a crisis, and the growing body of evidence suggests it is, then our response feels strangely muted. Where is the public outcry? Where is the sustained pressure for meaningful change?
Why are we not mobilising in the same visible, disruptive way we do for other causes that affect our society?
Perhaps it is because the threat feels less tangible. Perhaps it is because the harm is gradual, not immediate. Or perhaps, more uncomfortably, it is because there is no clear financial incentive driving action. No direct, measurable cost that compels us to act decisively.
But the cost is there. It is being paid in the wellbeing of a generation.
If we are serious about protecting our children and those who come after them, then awareness alone is not enough. We should be willing to demand change, to challenge the systems causing harm, and yes, to step away from and even boycott the platforms that profit from it.
Anything less risks making us complicit through inaction and other protests pale in significance. – Yours, etc,
AISLINN BEAHAN,
Co Dublin.
A trip down memory lane
Sir, – Emer McLysaght’s homage piece on her late dad and wonky renovations titled “My late dad’s legacy is the love and care he put into each slightly wonky home renovation job,” April 9th, was delightful and brought memories of my own childhood, my Dad and the various design “choices” of my parents in the 90s/00s
Emer might argue I am not a millennial as I was only born in 1995 when she was likely watching Dawson’s Creek and calling her friends on the home phone between ad breaks.
But the “yellow bathroom” in my parents’ home (Imagine yellow enamelled bath, matching sink and loo with complementing cream tiles with yellow “fleck”. louvre sink cabinet doors, shagpile carpet and pine ceiling) would argue differently.
I find myself looking at my niece (18 months) and thinking about the “she’ll never know what it,s like…” moments such as but not limited to:
Bopping the wood veneered box TV so the image would stay on the screen.
Floor to ceiling brown velvet curtains with matching brown carpet and rusty orange foam filled sofas.
Being given out to for not rewinding the VHS tape after watching it.
Pine kitchen with tile splashback of a fruit bowl.
Family of five bundling themselves into the family MKII 1989 Golf GTI because nothing says family like a tiny car with no seatbelts!.
Bonus point; Dad installing plywood around the walls of the narrow garage so as not to damage the car doors. Never once did I witness the car parked in there. – Yours, etc,
GRAHAM BLAY,
Dublin 9.
The whole of the moon
Sir, – Diarmaid Ferriter posits that “the moon should be left alone” while we focus on problems here on Earth (“Fawning focus on the Artemis II mission reveals a disturbing arrogance,” April 10th). While I agree with some of his underlying points, this presents too stark a choice.
Humanity is one good whack of a space rock away from catastrophe. Our ability to foresee and forestall such risks – and to spread our risk more broadly as a species – lies in reaching beyond our planet and into the wider solar system.
It will bring its own new dangers and dilemmas, but surely also new opportunities. History suggests that retreat from new frontiers has rarely insulated humanity from risk.
Nor should we underestimate the motivating power of space exploration to move people – particularly the young – to broaden their horizons.
AARON McKENNA,
Clonee,
Co Meath.
Sir, – I wasn’t born when humans first walked on the moon, but I vividly remember watching in 2014 as the Rosetta spacecraft – launched a decade earlier and having travelled 6.4 billion kilometres – guided the tiny Philae lander on to a four-kilometre-wide comet that was hurtling through space at 135,000 kmph.
That achievement, executed from Earth with extraordinary precision, remains one of the most inspiring demonstrations of human ingenuity I have witnessed.
I am an admirer of Diarmaid Ferriter’s work and his reminder that history should temper our assumptions is well made. Of course space exploration must be guided by ethics and by a commitment to the common good. But he is overreaching to suggest that scientific ambition should be constrained by historical suspicion.
Lunar and deep space exploration represent some of the finest expressions of human curiosity, creativity, ambition and technical brilliance. They expand our understanding, inspire new generations, and remind us of what is possible when imagination is matched by science and discipline.
We should learn from history, certainly, but not be limited by it. Onwards and upwards. – Yours, etc,
ALAN KEALY,
Blackrock,
Co Dublin.
Debating and the Dáil
Sir, – Thomas Morris Gormally (Letters, April 7th) rightly laments the lack of genuine and constructive debate in Dáil Éireann.
While the conduct of members in the British House of Commons is not always a model to be followe, it cannot be denied that the quality of debate in that House is much higher than in the Dáil.
I would suggest that there are two principal reasons for this. First, in the House of Commons, the Speaker is in sole charge of who gets called to speak in debates and alternates between government and opposition members.
In the Dáil, speaking slots are pre-determined, with a great deal of control exerted by the party whips.
Secondly, in the House of Commons, members wishing to speak are required to be present for the opening and closing speeches of the debate and at least the speeches preceding and following their own.
This means that the debate is genuinely framed around what other members have said, rather than a recitation of a prepared script which has no regard to what has been said before it.
If members of the Dáil were interested in improving the standard of debates, changing the rules so that the Ceann Comhairle chooses who gets to speak and requiring attendance at a substantial part of the debate would certainly assist. – Yours , etc,
DECLAN HARMON,
Dublin 10.
A brief affair
Sir, – After many years of loyal listening to our national broadcaster, I recently strayed – tempted by the fresh voices and lively presenters over on Newstalk. For a time, it felt like a promising new relationship; engaging, entertaining, and full of potential.
Alas , it wasn’t to last.
What began as the occasional ad break soon turned into what can only be described as an Olympic event in commercial endurance.
Just as a conversation gathered momentum, in came another cheerful interruption urging me to fly somewhere, change my broadband or consider a deal I didn’t ask for.
And so, with ears slightly frazzled but expectations recalibrated, I have returned to the familiar comfort of our national broadcaster – where the only thing competing for my attention is the actual content. – Yours, etc,
ED O’NEILL,
Dublin 13.
