Sir, – Your editorial "National Maternity Hospital – potential for progress" (February 14th) is optimistic that nine words will provide a "legal bulwark" that will eliminate concerns about the NMH relocation project.
It is impossible to reconcile the apparent agreement to “carry out all medical procedures allowed under Irish law” with previous statements. When the Religious Sisters of Charity announced in May 2017 their intention (not yet realised) to depart St Vincent’s Healthcare Group (SVHG), the Order’s leader Sr Mary Christian confirmed that their successors, St Vincent’s Holdings, would be “true to the values of our foundress”.
A simultaneous announcement stated that “the Board, management and 4,000 staff of SVHG are absolutely committed to upholding the vision and values of Mary Aikenhead”.
Note 27 in the SVHG Annual Accounts for 2017 commits the directors of St Vincent’s Holdings to upholding those same vision and values.
:fill(white):background_color(white)/static.themebuilder.aws.arc.pub/irishtimes/1647534191476.png)
When the constitution of St Vincent’s Holdings restating the “core values” of the Order was published in August 2020, the retention of Catholic ethos was undeniable.
We are being asked to believe that the vision and values of this Catholic religious Order include the provision of abortion, elective sterilisation, and IVF.
The serious doubt raised by this proposition is precisely why a list of specific procedures must be included in any licence agreement. The argument that this might complicate the introduction of new procedures in the future does not stand up to analysis as the licence could be future proofed by the inclusion of a phrase such as “and all other healthcare procedures that may become legal in the future”.
Gene editing is one area that requires careful scrutiny before the State cedes control of its flagship maternity hospital to a Catholic company for 299 years.
Developments in such technologies as CRISPR-Cas 9 suggest its future use for the treatment of numerous genetic diseases, including, for example, cystic fibrosis.
While Catholic theologians weigh up whether gene editing might reduce abortion in the future, it is incontrovertible that when the technology uses IVF or fertilised human embryos, it would be prohibited in Catholic healthcare.
With up to €1 billion of public money at issue, members of the Cabinet must ask themselves if it has been established beyond reasonable doubt that the new NMH can achieve the feat of being the only hospital in the world under Catholic patronage to provide procedures globally prohibited by Catholic law.
The consequences of getting it wrong would be apparent within a few short years. – Yours etc,
Dr PETER BOYLAN,
Dublin 6.