The Aword

  • Increase font size
  • Default font size
  • Decrease font size


E-mail Print PDF


This decision was reiterated on Feb. 1, 1999, when the DOH concluded, after the 

"fullest consideration"

that neither Public Inquiry nor Government compensation was warranted.

As Dr. Charles Burton wrote in his 1999 Editorial ([1]),

"The government has stated that ?the risk of arachnoiditis was known and clinical decisions taken in what was believed to be in the patient's best interests.'It is truly unfortunate that the risks being referred to were not known either to the physicians providing, or the patients receiving these foreign body substances at the time these ?clinical decisions' were made."

In May 1999, on behalf of the Arachnoiditis Trust, I submitted a Memorandum to the Health Select Committee for Adverse Clinical Incidents.

In this, I raised some eight issues relating to iatrogenic arachnoiditis, including calling for a Public Inquiry into Myodil-related arachnoiditis.

Sadly, this elicited no response from the Government.

In December 1999, the Ombudsman, Mr. Buckley is recorded as stating that official departments were still putting obstacles in the way of those seeking access to official information.

[1] Burton, C   Governmental Responsibility in Protecting the Public Trust: The Issue of Adhesive Arachnoiditis and Spine Care, available at