On 16 August Ms Justice O’Malley in the High Court rejected a pregnant woman's challenge to HSE home birth policy. The HSE currently allows home births under a memorandum of understanding with independent midwives who assist in such births. The reason for the existence of the memorandum of understanding is because professional indemnity insurance for this kind of work has become unavailable in the private market. The HSE however refuses to indemnify certain categories of births including those where the mother has previously had a caesarean section. The plaintiff, Ms Aja Teehan, had a caesarean section six years ago.
Ms Teehan was not seeking an order compelling the HSE to facilitate a home birth but rather challenged the blanket policy of not allowing home births where the mother previously had a caesarean section, rather than deciding each case on its merits. The plaintiff claimed that the risk of uterine rupture following a caesarian section was just 0.5 percent.
Ms Justice O’Malley noted that there is no statutory obligation for the HSE to provide for home births. She said “The HSE is entitled, having regard to the potential consequences of uterine rupture, to provide maternity services in such a way as to minimise the risk of its occurance, even if that risk is small.” She also held that for the courts to change the HSE's home birth policy would constitute “manifest irrationality”.
Ms Teehan is considering an appeal to the Supreme Court. The hearing for costs has been pushed back until 6 September which is less than a month before Ms Teehan’s due date.
Click here to read the full judgment.
Click here to read an article in the Irish Times about the case.