# National Maternity Hospital



## cremeegg (26 Apr 2017)

The story so far: I'm trying to stick to the facts.

The existing NMH in Holles st has passed its sell by date and needs to be replaced.

The decision was made to move to build anew on the campus of St Vincent's Hospital. It makes sense to have a major teaching hospital on the same site.

The €300m cost of the new building would be paid by the tax payer.

The new building would belong to the Sisters of Charity's trust, as the site belongs to them.

A deal was reached by the dept of Health and the sisters covering the running of the hospital and the exact relationship between the new NMH and the nuns. This was confidential.

Objections arose at the state giving a €300m new hospital to the nuns. These seem to be based on the nuns role in the mother and baby homes, the redress scheme and the matter of an/no apology.

Peter Boylan former Master of the NMH then very publicly joined the objectors.

The board including the current Master Rhona Mahony, called on him to resign as they felt he had criticised their position without consultation.

The nuns made huffy statements along the lines, well if you dont want the deal, we dont care, build your NMH somewhere else.

A bishop said that any procedures in a catholic hospital would have to be in line with catholic practice 

The confidential deal was published.

Petre Boylan is not for resigning. 

Have I missed anything ?


----------



## Seagull (26 Apr 2017)

You left out the rant about proper planning, and the apparent inability of anyone involved in the decision making in projects like this to spend more than 5 minutes thinking about the fairly obvious issues.


----------



## cremeegg (26 Apr 2017)

I'm trying to stick to the facts for now. I fully intend to rant, and indulge in wild speculation with added ad hominem arguments at a later stage.


----------



## Purple (26 Apr 2017)

It looks like you've covered everything cremeegg. 

Oh, one thing; I would like to know who will be paying for the large Septic Tank which is usually required when the Nuns are involved with pregnant women and babies. I think it's only fair that the State does not cover that cost.


----------



## Ceist Beag (26 Apr 2017)

I think you have one mistake in there cremeegg, the board did not call on Boylan to resign. The board did not meet to discuss asking him to resign so it looks like Kearns and Mahony together made this call. Certainly some members of the board were not consulted so the call to resign was not from the board.


----------



## thedaddyman (26 Apr 2017)

I heard on the radio that Peter Boylan is Rhona Mahoney's brother in law. If that is correct, interesting dinner conversations in that house.!!

Some of the reporting to me has been a bit OTT. Some of it almost implied there will be nuns and priests looking over the doctor's shoulders all the time which obviously will not be the case.

My bigger issue is the state spending a fortune building the hospital and then handing it over to a private entity. As a point of principle I don't like that. To add all of this fiasco to the Childrens Hospital costs spinning out of control and the fact that that hospital is being built in a place that will be horrendous for anyone outside of Dublin to get to beggars belief. Also why are 2 hospitals being built at all?. Surely there is merit in combining the 2?

The other question is the size of the board of the NMH, I believe it was 27 members voted. You can't have proper governance in a board that size, it allows people to abdicate responsibility


----------



## Leper (27 Apr 2017)

NMH Cost  €300M+.  Cork University Maternity Hospital was completed 10 years ago for less than a quarter of that.  Back then the price of labour was much higher too. Something wrong somewhere . . . .
Does anybody know the projected amount of yearly births in NMH?


----------



## Purple (27 Apr 2017)

Leper said:


> NMH Cost  €300M+.  Cork University Hospital was completed 10 years ago for less than a quarter of that.  Back then the price of labour was much higher too. Something wrong somewhere . . . .
> Does anybody know the projected amount of yearly births in NMH?


CUH has around 1000 beds, the new Children's hospital has 375 beds... strange...


----------



## amtc (27 Apr 2017)

I could be losing the point here. 

The children's hospital is to be built in James to be co located with an adult hospital and a teaching hospital. 

The maternity hospital in Vincent's. Surely it would make more sense for them all to be co located or not. 

Transport wise I did it on aa route planner...26 mins by car between Vincent's and James. 

Connolly would've been a much better option.


----------



## Purple (27 Apr 2017)

amtc said:


> I could be losing the point here.
> 
> The children's hospital is to be built in James to be co located with an adult hospital and a teaching hospital.
> 
> ...


Connolly is not a top tier hospital. If I was knocked down in Blanchardstown I'd ask to be brought to James's.
From an infrastructure point of view James's is the best option as there is close train access, LUAS access, good bus access and bus lanes from the M50 for emergency vehicles. What they do need is a budget hotel nearby for family members to stay in. That's the model in the USA where there are massive hospital campuses (The one in Houston employs over 100,000 people). We don't need that but we do need the support services.

A maternity hospital will have the services required for babies. The co-location has more to do with the mothers and their needs should there be complications. 

Does anyone know what the ownership structure of the new Children's Hospital will be?


----------



## cremeegg (27 Apr 2017)

Poor Desmond Martin is the chairman of the NMH, seems it is automatically the Catholic Archbishop of Dublin, there are also a number of Cathoilc parish priests on the board. Poor Desmond Martin has been asking the Department of Health to take him off the board for a number of years.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/soci...removal-from-chair-at-holles-street-1.3062640

So we are expected to believe that the NMH becomes completely independent of the nuns, who under current plans own the land on which it is to be built, and will own the actual building itself. This independent NMH will be run, independently you understand, by a board which Ex-officio has at least 4 Catholic clergy on the independent board.

You couldn't make it up. These by the way are still facts. Not rants, not even raves.


----------



## cremeegg (27 Apr 2017)

The full list of members of the board is here 

[broken link removed]

One of then is known to me personally, and while he is an admirable person with an exemplary record of achievement, and impressive and relevant qualifications qualifications for a role in a maternity hospital, he makes no bones about dedicating his retirement years to furthering the role of the Catholic Church in society


----------



## Leper (27 Apr 2017)

Purple said:


> CUH has around 1000 beds, the new Children's hospital has 375 beds... strange...



Sorry Purple, I had a senior "moment" earlier and should have said Cork University Maternity Hospital and not Cork University Hospital (on same site but different hospitals).


----------



## Leper (28 Apr 2017)

It's late in the day, but the New Maternity Hospital is destined for "twinning" next to St-James Hospital.  I understand the informed thinking brigade see it as a "must" that all the medical brains should be concentrated in one area. St-James Hospital is as near to unreachable as possible at the moment.  A huge maternity hospital on the same site will contribute to being more unreachable and more babies born at crossroads/roundabouts enroute.  I'm sure there won't be too many medical brains at such junctions. But, will the consultants make more money and have less costs if the NMH is located in St-James?  

I can't understand why the government won't grasp the nettle and even at this late state locate the New Maternity Hospital away from the snarled city of Dublin.


----------



## Purple (28 Apr 2017)

Leper said:


> It's late in the day, but the New Maternity Hospital is destined for "twinning" next to St-James Hospital.  I understand the informed thinking brigade see it as a "must" that all the medical brains should be concentrated in one area. St-James Hospital is as near to unreachable as possible at the moment.  A huge maternity hospital on the same site will contribute to being more unreachable and more babies born at crossroads/roundabouts enroute.  I'm sure there won't be too many medical brains at such junctions. But, will the consultants make more money and have less costs if the NMH is located in St-James?
> 
> I can't understand why the government won't grasp the nettle and even at this late state locate the New Maternity Hospital away from the snarled city of Dublin.


Over a third of the population of the country live in Dublin. The national transportation infrastructure radiates from and to Dublin. The LUAS runs through the St. James's site. There is a train station down the road and there is a QBC most of the way in from the M50. 
It's probably the best option. 
It makes no sense to build it away from Dublin. There could be an argument for a different part of the city. 
The problem will be for parents and visitors getting there and the lack of parking will be an issue. Mind you there's only 20 parking spots for anyone turning up at Blanchardstown A&E. lots of spots for the people working there but almost nothing for the public. 
If you are having chest pains you can park at the front of the hospital and walk around back to A&E. Why should we expect the State to start running hospitals with the main focus on sick people?


----------



## cremeegg (28 Apr 2017)

Leper said:


> the New Maternity Hospital is destined for "twinning" next to St-James Hospital.



They are all just holy places in Dublin to me, but isn't the new CHILDREN'S hospital going to St James and the new MATERNITY hospital going to St Vincents.


----------



## Purple (28 Apr 2017)

cremeegg said:


> isn't the new CHILDREN'S hospital going to St James and the new MATERNITY hospital going to St Vincents.


Yes, that's correct.


----------



## Delboy (28 Apr 2017)

The Coombe Women's hospital is moving to St James also


----------



## Leper (28 Apr 2017)

cremeegg said:


> They are all just holy places in Dublin to me, but isn't the new CHILDREN'S hospital going to St James and the new MATERNITY hospital going to St Vincents.



Well spotted there Delboy and Purple. Getting confusion into my Dublin hospitals locations.


----------



## Vanessa (28 Apr 2017)

Thankfully we have a Sinn Fein councillor on the board of Holles St to keep everyone honest(NO!)
This gent voted in favour of the move a number of months ago but then when he saw saw the reaction of some people ( as well as an order from 44 Parnell Sq) he decided that he was against it.
I wouldnt trust himself and Carr the Lord Mayor of Dublin to go the shop to buy bananas


----------



## cremeegg (29 Apr 2017)

I have three questions about this move itself.

1. What I like to think of as the *Denis O Brien question*. Why is €300m of public money being provided for what will be a privately owned asset. Imagine the public reaction if the state were to build a €300m hospital on land owned by Denis. I suspect that there would be uproar at the idea. Is it different for nuns who are already in the hospital business?

2. This brings us to what I like to think of as the *Ryan Report question*. The Sisters of Charity have a record of running institutions, and it is not one that would prompt a reasonable person to entrust them with further such responsibilities.

At St Joseph’s Industrial school in Kilkenny, little girls as young as eight who complained of molestation by male lay staff were ignored, disbelieved or blamed for their abuse. Children were told their mothers were prostitutes. Children were fostered out to paedophiles. On three occasions the nuns hired paedophile lay workers, then failed to act when informed by children and sometimes by concerned adults about what was happening. Children were subject to severe corporal punishment right up until the 1990s.

See https://www.theguardian.com/comment...-charity-abuse-maternity-hospital-irish-state for more on this.

3. The 3rd question is the* Financial Probity question*. 

The Sisters of Charity offered to contribute €5 million towards the €1.5 billion redress costs incurred by the State involving former residents of the institutions. However, they have contributed just €2 million to date.

Catholic religious congregations who ran residential institutions where children were abused have paid just 13% of the costs of a redress scheme set up to help survivors, according to a 2017 report by the Comptroller and Auditor General published by the Department of Education. I have no separate figures but the Sisters of charity were one of the main congregations involved.

Under the 2002 Indemnity agreement, (don't get me started) the Sisters agreed to transferred property to the state. Among those promised were the Sacred Heart centre in Waterford. It has not been transferred, at least as of the end of March.

So the question is are the sisters financially proper persons to be entrusted with state assets.


----------



## Ceist Beag (2 May 2017)

Only one question I have is why does Harris not invoke a CPO? I have seen him quoted as saying he won't do so but has he said why not? It beggars belief that we would invest €300m of public money into something that the state won't own.


----------



## Purple (2 May 2017)

Ceist Beag said:


> Only one question I have is why does Harris not invoke a CPO? I have seen him quoted as saying he won't do so but has he said why not? It beggars belief that we would invest €300m of public money into something that the state won't own.


We currently invest billions into schools, universities and hospitals which the state doesn't own and which are allowed to maintain a religious ethos. This is only a major issue because its new.


----------



## cremeegg (2 May 2017)

Yes it is only a major issue because it is new. But when the state is about to spend €300m is a good time to consider if the arrangement should be changed.


----------



## Purple (2 May 2017)

cremeegg said:


> Yes it is only a major issue because it is new. But when the state is about to spend €300m is a good time to consider if the arrangement should be changed.


Should that include the billions we currently spend on salaries, equipment and upkeep on hospitals and schools we don't own and staff we don't employ?


----------



## cremeegg (2 May 2017)

I firmly believe that all children should have a secular education provided by the state, supplemented by religious education provided by their parents where that is the parents wish.

I think the idea of schooling by religious denomination, including the awful multi-denominational concept of Educate together, is abhorrent.

But the topic for discussion in this thread and in the country generally at the moment is the National Maternity Hospital.


----------



## Purple (2 May 2017)

cremeegg said:


> I firmly believe that all children should have a secular education provided by the state, supplemented by religious education provided by their parents where that is the parents wish.
> 
> I think the idea of schooling by religious denomination, including the awful multi-denominational concept of Educate together, is abhorrent.
> 
> But the topic for discussion in this thread and in the country generally at the moment is the National Maternity Hospital.


I agree. I think this is a classic example of how we have the wrong discussions in this country.
Just like the anger and opposition to the cost and waste and structural inefficiencies in  small semi-state like Irish Water but none of us bats an eyelid at all the other state bodies, larger semi-states and so-called commercial semi-states which are structured and run in the same way.

We currently give billions every years to institutions owned and run by religious bodies to provide state services. The National Maternity Hospital is just the latest example and is entirely consistent with how we fund and deliver the vast majority of our educational and health services.


----------



## thedaddyman (2 May 2017)

Purple said:


> We currently give billions every years to institutions owned and run by religious bodies to provide state services. The National Maternity Hospital is just the latest example and is entirely consistent with how we fund and deliver the vast majority of our educational and health services.



It is an interesting discussion, did the Catholic Church fill the gap in state services because the state wasn't delivering them or did the state decide there was no need to provide services because the Catholic Church was already doing it for them?

Regardless as to who runs the hospital, the bigger issue here is spending €300m (meaning €500m when it is finally built) of taxpayers money to build something and then hand it over to someone else. It's why I detest the M50 toll bridge as well.


----------



## Purple (2 May 2017)

thedaddyman said:


> It is an interesting discussion, did the Catholic Church fill the gap in state services because the state wasn't delivering them or did the state decide there was no need to provide services because the Catholic Church was already doing it for them?


 Ireland in the 40's and 50's did what the Church told them. 



thedaddyman said:


> Regardless as to who runs the hospital, the bigger issue here is spending €300m (meaning €500m when it is finally built) of taxpayers money to build something and then hand it over to someone else. It's why I detest the M50 toll bridge as well.


 The State didn't pay for the bridge.


----------



## cremeegg (2 May 2017)

thedaddyman said:


> It is an interesting discussion, did the Catholic Church fill the gap in state services because the state wasn't delivering them or did the state decide there was no need to provide services because the Catholic Church was already doing it for them?



I agree with Purple, I don't think either of these positions reflect what occurred.

In independent Ireland from the 1920s the Church prevented the state involving itself in the provision of social services. the mother and child scheme was just the most obvious example.

Indeed they were at it under the Brits too. The British government introduced secular education where children of all religions would be educated together.

"The schools were controlled by a State body, the National Board of Education, with a six-member board consisting of two Roman Catholics, two Church of Ireland, and two Presbyterians. In the National Schools, there was strict delimitation between religious and non-religious education, where the teacher had to declare that religious education was beginning, hang a sign on the wall or door indicating that religious education was in process, and remove all religious symbols and objects from sight when religious education finished."

We went a long way backwards from there.


----------



## PMU (2 May 2017)

cremeegg said:


> Yes it is only a major issue because it is new. But when the state is about to spend €300m is a good time to consider if the arrangement should be changed.


This is just a building project, and shows how incorrectly we do things in this country. Rather than hold a public tender competition and let the market provide the new hospital, the HSE decided it was best placed  to decide where is the most appropriate location for this hospital, which was, needless to say, done behind closed doors in a totally non-transparent manner. The issue is not 'should the nuns have control over the new hospital' but rather (a) why was a public tender not used to select the new hospital (i.e. a design, build and manage contract) ; and (b) as there was not a tender, what selection criteria were used in arriving at the current decision?    Even the HSE must admit is doesn't have a track record in success, and based on its performance to date, it's unlikely this will be a success either.


----------



## Protocol (2 May 2017)

thedaddyman said:


> It is an interesting discussion, did the Catholic Church fill the gap in state services because the state wasn't delivering them or did the state decide there was no need to provide services because the Catholic Church was already doing it for them?



Regarding primary education, the State planned to provide this itself in the 1830s, and it seems that mixed schools were initially established.

However, the Presbyterians requested that they run their own schools.

Soon after, the Catholic church followed.


----------



## jjm (2 May 2017)

Lots of Catholic Church primary school around Ireland were set with the help of the local Landlords .


----------



## Leper (3 May 2017)

PMU's post above is probably the most telling on this thread. It is not too late to pull out of the current deal and go to tender and have the hospital built in another site to be bought by the government. People are hung up on where in Dublin City the NMH should be built.  Let's take a site near Naas for example. I bet you would get to it faster from nearly anywhere in Dublin City than to another Dublin City site.

The other hang-up most have is the availability of expertise from an adjoining hospital. If we're going to build another maternity hospital which will have state-of-the-art facilities, it is not too much to ask that any expertise required should be available within the hospital, not from another hospital. The new maternity hospital should be for the people and not the consultants.


----------



## cremeegg (3 May 2017)

Irish water, educational facilities, HSE tendering processes. All important issues, and while the public are distracted the church keeps its control.

If the nuns gain, (not hold but gain) , a grip on the NMH it will be a major reverse for the idea of publicly controlled and accountable state services. And the Irish people will have no one to blame but ourselves. If there is another scandal in a church run institution I don't want to hear about it, we have lost any right to sympathise with the victims.


----------



## Purple (3 May 2017)

Leper said:


> PMU's post above is probably the most telling on this thread. It is not too late to pull out of the current deal and go to tender and have the hospital built in another site to be bought by the government. People are hung up on where in Dublin City the NMH should be built.  Let's take a site near Naas for example. I bet you would get to it faster from nearly anywhere in Dublin City than to another Dublin City site.


 There is some argument for having it outside the M50, Tallaght or Blanchardstown being the most obvious options, but not Naas or anywhere that far out. How do staff and visitors and day patients get there? What about 6 week check-up’s? James’s is very well served with busses, the LUAS and taxis. There is a QBC most of the way in from the M50 via Palmerstown and Heuston train station is a few minutes away.




Leper said:


> The other hang-up most have is the availability of expertise from an adjoining hospital. If we're going to build another maternity hospital which will have state-of-the-art facilities, it is not too much to ask that any expertise required should be available within the hospital, not from another hospital. The new maternity hospital should be for the people and not the consultants.


 No, that just doesn’t work. The issue is that if there is an unusual complication with the mother what is needed is a specialist who treats that sort of condition all the time. Say they find that she has a heart defect or is experiencing kidney failure post-delivery. They are not the sorts of skills which you will find in a maternity hospital. In the same was as you want the person reading your scan to be someone who spends all their time reading that sort of scan; expertise is built on skill and repetition. No single hospital can have the full array of skills required to cover every eventuality.


----------



## Leper (3 May 2017)

A few things going through my mind regarding the NMH wherever it is to be situated:-

1. We had a thread a few months ago about too many industries locating to Dublin putting a demand on housing, services etc.  I remember arguing that if Dublin won't take them the rest of the country will.  I wonder would it make such a difference if the NMH was placed in Tallaght, Blanchardstown or even the like of Newbridge, Kildare or Naas. Two huge hospitals in the same acre in Dublin City will cause traffic chaos on an ongoing basis.  I can see roundabouts being christened "Birth of a Nation Cross" or "Baby Junction" and the chances of a newborn babies being brought into the world assisted by more taxi drivers than midwives. Cork University Maternity Hospital caters for maternity demands for the whole Munster region on a daily basis and with hindsight it would have been far easier for many mothers-to-be if it had been located near Fermoy. Fermoy is accessible in under a half an hour from anywhere in Cork City and it takes a half hour anyway to get access to the Cork University Maternity Hospital from anywhere in Cork city.

2. I'm not sold in more expertise being available from neighbouring hospitals no matter where they are. Purple puts up a good case, but no matter what way I look at having all services within a stone's throw is to suit the consultants moneywise etc rather than the mothers-to-be.

3. I'll probably get slated for this, but the religious ownership of land is getting nearer to a non event by the week.  It's become like chasing Hitler to punish him although he died 72 years ago. How many Sisters-of-Charity will be in Ireland in say 20 years time? . . . or even 10 years from now? For that matter how many Christian Brothers will be around even in the near future.  Many parishes in Ireland have already cut back hugely on Sunday Masses due to lack of priests. Are we flogging a dead horse?


----------



## cremeegg (3 May 2017)

Leper said:


> I'll probably get slated for this, but the religious ownership of land is getting nearer to a non event by the week.  It's become like chasing Hitler to punish him although he died 72 years ago. How many Sisters-of-Charity will be in Ireland in say 20 years time? . . . or even 10 years from now? For that matter how many Christian Brothers will be around even in the near future.  Many parishes in Ireland have already cut back hugely on Sunday Masses due to lack of priests. Are we flogging a dead horse?



The greatest trick the devil ever played was to convince you he didn't exist. Religion certainly has all the best metaphors.

There may not be many religious left, but they have made careful provision that their "ethos" survives. Schools,(I know more about schools that hospitals) have been handed over to trusts, trusteed have been appointed to ensure that the vision of the founder continues. To be honest Ronan Mullen is probably better able to promote a catholic religious ethos in schools than the average nun. He is a director of over 100 second level schools. [broken link removed]

The proposed Independent (independent of what I ask) board of the NMH will have 4 nuns as members. I suppose they are experts on maternity matters.


----------



## Leo (4 May 2017)

Leper said:


> 3. I'll probably get slated for this, but the religious ownership of land is getting nearer to a non event by the week.



It's not really a good approach to hope they all die out and their influence wanes over time. Ask those denied certain treatments in Vincent's as a result of their religious ethos whether they're happy to wait a decade or two...or more.


----------



## Leper (4 May 2017)

I know Leo is making a salient point "Ask those denied certain treatments in Vincent's . . . ."     No matter where the NMH is to be located nobody is going to ask "those denied certain treatments" anything. 

From the start of this thread I have been suggesting that the NMH should be in a site solely owned by the state and run by the state for the people of Ireland and not just the Medical Profession and no places on the board should be given to anybody guided by any religion. The government was elected to run the country and should do so without influence from all those guided by more profit etc.


----------



## Purple (5 May 2017)

Leper said:


> I know Leo is making a salient point "Ask those denied certain treatments in Vincent's . . . ."     No matter where the NMH is to be located nobody is going to ask "those denied certain treatments" anything.
> 
> From the start of this thread I have been suggesting that the NMH should be in a site solely owned by the state and run by the state for the people of Ireland and not just the Medical Profession and no places on the board should be given to anybody guided by any religion. The government was elected to run the country and should do so without influence from all those guided by more profit etc.


I agree with all of that.


----------



## Purple (29 May 2017)

So the Nuns aren't going to have anything to do with it. Good.


----------



## Leo (30 May 2017)

It'll be interesting to see the make up of this new board, and whether this will see an end to the practice of family members being asked to pop out to a pharmacy to pick up prescriptions of the contraceptive pill as the hospital pharmacy refuse to stock it.


----------



## cremeegg (30 May 2017)

The situation now is that instead of €300m of the states money being spent to build a new hospital to be owned by the Sisters of charity and run by the SVHG, €300m of the states money will be spent to build a new hospital which will be owned by the SVHG.

If the decision of the nuns to relinquish their role reduces the church involvement, I welcome that. 

I still do not understand why €300m of the state's money is being spent to build a hospital that will not be owned by the state.  The Denis O Brien question remains.


----------



## Purple (30 May 2017)

cremeegg said:


> The situation now is that instead of €300m of the states money being spent to build a new hospital to be owned by the Sisters of charity and run by the SVHG, €300m of the states money will be spent to build a new hospital which will be owned by the SVHG.
> 
> If the decision of the nuns to relinquish their role reduces the church involvement, I welcome that.
> 
> I still do not understand why €300m of the state's money is being spent to build a hospital that will not be owned by the state.  The Denis O Brien question remains.


I fully agree.
Will the Sisters of Charity get any income from SVHG?


----------



## Firefly (30 May 2017)

cremeegg said:


> The Denis O Brien question remains.



Hi cremeegg,

What's the Denis O'Brien question you refer to?

Firefly.


----------



## Purple (30 May 2017)

Some good media coverage here


----------



## cremeegg (30 May 2017)

Firefly said:


> Hi cremeegg,
> 
> What's the Denis O'Brien question you refer to?
> 
> Firefly.



See post 21 in this thread.

Basically, while there were specific objections to the nuns being given the hospital, why should any private company be given a €300m hospital. If the state built a hospital on land owned by DOB there would be uproar at a private company benefitting from public money and rightly so. Why is there not uproar about the SVHG, a private company, getting a €300m hospital. Maybe I should start a rumour that Denis owns it.


----------

