Chamber and committees

Scottish Government officials informally discussed with Dr Veronikis the possibility of meeting with him during his September visit. However, this was ultimately not considered practical.

This is a matter for lawyers and the patients concerned. As such, the Scottish Government does not hold the information sought.

Any woman who is experiencing difficulties, including where she suspects this may be due to partial mesh removal, should not hesitate to speak to her GP or other clinicians involved in her case. Those clinicians are fully expected to treat the patient’s concerns seriously and to take appropriate action. The pathway of care for women who are experiencing complications is set out in answer to S5W-23623 on 6 June 2019.

All answers to written parliamentary questions are available on the Parliament’s website, the search facility for which can be found at http://www.parliament.scot/parliamentarybusiness/28877.aspx .

The Scottish Government would encourage any woman who is pursuing a case to apply for Legal Aid should she feel she may qualify. Advice on Legal Aid is available here .

NHS Central Legal Office confirms that no cases that are part of a large group action have been settled out of court. It is understood a small number of individual clinical negligence cases involving mesh have settled in this way; however for reasons of confidentiality a precise number cannot be stated.

Any material taken to the US will be determined by the clinicians undertaking the visit.

All cases are treated individually depending on the circumstances of the patient in question. In each case the Scottish Government expects all appropriate and available treatments to be discussed with the patient, allowing the patient to give their informed consent.

As indicated in response to S5O-03674, it is important that we give further consideration to those reports. This is a serious issue and the proper process requires careful review of selected patient cases. We therefore need to establish which cases require review and, importantly, to identify individuals with the required knowledge, authority, standing and independence to carry that out. Health Board accountable officers discussed the matter at their October meeting. I have asked NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde to propose a means, scope and timeline for that review to be conducted, with assurance from the Accountable Officers group and the Chief Medical Officer that that is the required level of response to determine the basis of the reports.

All answers to written parliamentary questions are available on the Parliament's website, the search facility for which can be found at: http://www.parliament.scot/parliamentarybusiness/28877.aspx

Earlier this year I asked that a short-life working group be set up to examine the present course of care for women who experience mesh complications. The group agreed a remit to consider what additional steps could be taken to offer choice to women who want – and are clinically suitable for – removal of mesh. The group further agreed to review and identify areas of best practice in the United Kingdom and beyond, and if not already available, consider how these can be provided in Scotland. The group's remit is set out in more detail in response to S5W-23623 on 6 June 2019.

Given the action already taken by the Scottish Government, it is not clear what a public inquiry would achieve.

All answers to written parliamentary questions are available on the Parliament’s website, the search facility for which can be found at http://www.parliament.scot/parliamentarybusiness/28877.aspx .

Neither the Scottish Government nor NHS Central Legal Office holds the information sought.