Sir, Recently I tried to raise, on the adjournment of the Dail, the implications of the decision of the Medical Council to hold the Dr Moira Woods case in public. It is further disturbing the continuing leaks to the media, and raises serious questions about this whole council as to whom it represents and what its agenda is.
Since the matter was ruled out of order in the Dail, as the council is set up by statute, I wonder where these questions can be asked. Where now is the controlling influence of Professor Stephen Doyle?
I am appalled at this decision, which further adds to my belief that this Medical Council, as elected, is not representative of the profession. How is it possible to bring a case of professional misconduct against a doctor whose sole purpose was the protection of children, and whose only defence can be to illustrate graphically how she came to her diagnosis?
Has the Medical Council, in its pursuit of this doctor, not taken the feelings and rights of these children into consideration? Are we now to take it that the Medical Council becomes the defendant of the alleged accused, and does this not seriously put at risk any doctor involved in child sexual abuse cases? Does it not give carte blanche to alleged abusing adults to attack the medical profession at no cost to themselves?
In my opinion, if there is a doubt about whether or not a child is abused, it puts the onus on the doctor to protect the child. Who, may I ask, will stand up for the children now? - Yours, etc.,
Leinster House,
Dublin 2.