A mother who the High Court heard is gravely ill with terminal cancer wants an early hearing of her High Court action over the alleged misreporting of her cervical smear test.
The woman's counsel told a High Court judge has opted not to have palliative chemotherapy and "can expect death in a very short period of time". The woman cannot be named by order of the court.
Jeremy Maher SC, instructed by Cian O'Carroll solicitor, told Mr Justice Paul Coffey it was a very sad case where the woman, who now has Stage 4 cancer, “has a very limited life expectancy”.
"She finds herself in a terrible position," counsel said.
She has sued the HSE over a smear test taken under the CervicalCheck national screening programme.
Smear test
It is claimed that in November 2016 she had the smear test which came back as negative. In June 2019, she was diagnosed as having invasive cervical cancer and underwent a radical hysterectomy and other procedures.
In May 2o21, the woman was diagnosed as having suffered a recurrence of cancer and is terminally ill.
It is claimed there was an alleged failure to correctly report on the 2016 smear test and the woman's cancer was allegedly allowed to develop and spread unidentified, unmonitored, and untreated until she was diagnosed with cervical cancer in June 2019.
It is further claimed she was allegedly deprived of the opportunity of treatment at a time when her disease was amenable to curative treatment. It is further alleged had the 2016 smear test been correctly reported, she would have been referred for a colonoscopy and could have had a surgical procedure and the lesion excised.
All the claims are denied.
HSE
Her husband has also brought a case against the HSE claiming for nervous shock, profound stress and distress.
Mr Maher SC told the court his side contended there was a 32-month delay in treatment for the woman and she “can expect death in a short period of time.”
Previously, she had been given a life expectancy of six to nine months, but she has since decided not to have palliative chemotherapy.
He asked for a trial date on March 30th and for the case to be specially fixed in the list. While the case had only begun in mid-February, this reflected the gravity of the woman's situation.
HSE counsel Eileen Barrington SC said her side was happy the case was being case managed, adding they would be happy to agree a date, but said they thought it was too soon to fix a trial date.
Mr Justice Coffey said it was a very sad and tragic case and said the court has an obligation to accommodate the woman with an early date for the trial of her action. Hers, he said, was “a deserving case”.
The judge, who provisionally set the date of the hearing for the end of next month, said it was not unreasonable that the court should set a date before Easter.
He said the onus was on both sides to try to facilitate the March 30th date.
