Survivors of the controversial procedure, symphysiotomy, have unanimously rejected the Government's redress scheme.

Last week, the Government announced the establishment of an ex-gratia scheme for women who underwent the procedure and said that it ‘profoundly regrets the serious and damaging effects' caused to women and their families who underwent this operation.

There are believed to be around 200 symphysiotomy survivors in Ireland. The procedure had been discontinued in all but one hospital by the mid-1960s, however, it continued at Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital in Drogheda until the mid-1980s.

It involved widening the pelvis to ease childbirth by dividing the cartilage of the pubic bone. However, the operation caused severe side-effects in many women, including life-long pain, incontinence, mobility problems and psychological problems.

The ex-gratia scheme would have allowed women to accept an award of between €50,000 and €150,000, ‘thereby relieving them of the burden of pursuing their case through the courts'.

The Department of Health said that in a very small number of cases, the insurers of the hospitals and the obstetricians who carried out this procedure had been found liable by the courts.

"However, Government recognises that the women affected are of advanced years, that such court cases can take a long time to come to a conclusion, and that not all women will want to pursue what can be a difficult case through the courts," it said.

It also acknowledged that by today's standards, ‘symphysiotomy would not be indicated'.

However, according to support group SoS (Survivors of Symphysiotomy), which represents 99% of women who underwent this procedure, ‘there has never been an official admission that symphysiotomy was wrong'.

"Our members have voted to reject Government plans for a grace and favour scheme that cuts corners on fairness and is based on the myth that these operations were appropriate," commented SoS chairperson, Marie O'Connor.

These plans were included in a report carried out on behalf of the Government by Judge Yvonne Murphy, however SoS said that it has ‘fundamental issues with the Murphy proposals'.

"There is to be no independent adjudication of awards, no independent individualised assessment of injuries and women will be required to sign away their legal rights as a condition of entry to this skewed process," Ms O'Connor noted.

She insisted that the scheme would be run by ‘unaccountable, faceless bureaucrats, bean counters whose priority is cost cutting'.

"Women are to be stripped of their legal and constitutional rights on entry into this Kafka-esque maze, before they know what the outcome will be. So, with no right of appeal to the courts, there will be no way out of this bureaucratic labyrinth," she said.

At extraordinary general meetings held over the weekend in Dublin and Cork, SoS members mandated the group's national executive to demand a better deal from Government.

"We demand an admission from the State that symphysiotomy was wrong, adjudication by a board that is independent of Government, independent individualised assessment of women's injuries, the right to advocacy, the right of appeal to the courts and levels of restitution commensurate with court awards in symphysiotomy cases," Ms O'Connor added.