Nuclear Autopsy inquiry
Trade and Industry Secretary Alistair Darling announced this afternoon in the House of Commons that he is asking the QC who investigated the Alder Hey hospital case to conduct an inquiry into allegations that workers in the nuclear industry had tissue samples taken from their bodies after death.
Michael Redfern, who led the Alder Hey Children's Hospital inquiry in Liverpool, has been asked to establish the facts and report to ministers.
All the cases where it is alleged that tissue may have been taken without family consent involve people who died in the 1960's and 1970's. According to BNFL tissue sampling began in the 1960s and ceased in 1992.
Alistair Darling, who announced the move in an emergency statement to the Commons, said that families of workers at the Sellafield site in Cumbria, and the public, wanted answers to questions raised by the latest disclosure.
Mr Darling said most of the workers covered by the revelation worked at Sellafield, but he added that one individual worked at the Capenhurst nuclear site in Cheshire after transferring from Sellafield. There was also data at Sellafield relating to an employee at the Springfields nuclear site in Lancashire and six at Aldermaston.
BNFL, which operates the Sellafield site, identified 65 cases in which tissue was taken from individuals which was then analysed for the radionuclide content of organs, said the minister.
"It's important to tell the House the limited nature of the records that are held by BNFL. These are medical records which show what analysis was done on organs removed following post mortem examination.
"Because they are medical records which dealt with the analysis carried out at Sellafield, they do not provide an audit trail which would show in every case who asked for such an examination under what authority and for what purpose. Nor do they disclose whether or not the appropriate consent from next of kin was received.
"Some records have more information than others but at this stage it is simply not clear what procedures were followed in every case.
"From the information I have, I can tell the House that 23 such requests for further examination and analysis were made following a coroner's inquest.
"A further 33 requests appear to follow a coroner's post mortem. Three requests were made associated with legal proceedings and there was one request made by an individual prior to death," said Mr Darling.
On the BBC News this afternoon a former health worker at the Sellafield site suggested that most of these tissue samples would have involved very small amounts of material - literally "a few grams."
A spokesman for BNFL, quoted in "The Sun" online edition, said that
"This is an historic issue not a current one, however our prime concern is the feelings of the families of those involved.
"The sampling of autopsy material began in the 1960s and ceased in the early 1990s. Files exist at Sellafield for 65 cases. An examination of the data has shown that in 56 of those cases the sampling was done associated with coroners' post-mortems or inquests.
"In five other cases it was done under instruction from other legally correct bases, such as family solicitors.
"For the remaining four cases there is no record of instruction or consent on file although this does not mean that appropriate requests were not made.
"The subject of sampling autopsy material came about at the present time because of a request to re-examine the historic research data to support new studies.
"That request was made by the Westlakes Research Institute to the Westlakes/NDA Research Governance Group and this is being considered by that group, the company and the unions. We are aware of work carried out by and published by other organisations.
"Tissue samples waiting to be analysed were stored appropriately, on occasions for several months, however the samples were destroyed by the actual analysis process.
"There is no tissue stored on site today and the practice of taking samples for radiological analysis ceased in 1992.
"We will consider with the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority any information we have and will discuss with other interested parties in order to agree a way forward."
Clearly the first thing to be done is to establish exactly what did happen, and whether proper permission was given for it.
Michael Redfern, who led the Alder Hey Children's Hospital inquiry in Liverpool, has been asked to establish the facts and report to ministers.
All the cases where it is alleged that tissue may have been taken without family consent involve people who died in the 1960's and 1970's. According to BNFL tissue sampling began in the 1960s and ceased in 1992.
Alistair Darling, who announced the move in an emergency statement to the Commons, said that families of workers at the Sellafield site in Cumbria, and the public, wanted answers to questions raised by the latest disclosure.
Mr Darling said most of the workers covered by the revelation worked at Sellafield, but he added that one individual worked at the Capenhurst nuclear site in Cheshire after transferring from Sellafield. There was also data at Sellafield relating to an employee at the Springfields nuclear site in Lancashire and six at Aldermaston.
BNFL, which operates the Sellafield site, identified 65 cases in which tissue was taken from individuals which was then analysed for the radionuclide content of organs, said the minister.
"It's important to tell the House the limited nature of the records that are held by BNFL. These are medical records which show what analysis was done on organs removed following post mortem examination.
"Because they are medical records which dealt with the analysis carried out at Sellafield, they do not provide an audit trail which would show in every case who asked for such an examination under what authority and for what purpose. Nor do they disclose whether or not the appropriate consent from next of kin was received.
"Some records have more information than others but at this stage it is simply not clear what procedures were followed in every case.
"From the information I have, I can tell the House that 23 such requests for further examination and analysis were made following a coroner's inquest.
"A further 33 requests appear to follow a coroner's post mortem. Three requests were made associated with legal proceedings and there was one request made by an individual prior to death," said Mr Darling.
On the BBC News this afternoon a former health worker at the Sellafield site suggested that most of these tissue samples would have involved very small amounts of material - literally "a few grams."
A spokesman for BNFL, quoted in "The Sun" online edition, said that
"This is an historic issue not a current one, however our prime concern is the feelings of the families of those involved.
"The sampling of autopsy material began in the 1960s and ceased in the early 1990s. Files exist at Sellafield for 65 cases. An examination of the data has shown that in 56 of those cases the sampling was done associated with coroners' post-mortems or inquests.
"In five other cases it was done under instruction from other legally correct bases, such as family solicitors.
"For the remaining four cases there is no record of instruction or consent on file although this does not mean that appropriate requests were not made.
"The subject of sampling autopsy material came about at the present time because of a request to re-examine the historic research data to support new studies.
"That request was made by the Westlakes Research Institute to the Westlakes/NDA Research Governance Group and this is being considered by that group, the company and the unions. We are aware of work carried out by and published by other organisations.
"Tissue samples waiting to be analysed were stored appropriately, on occasions for several months, however the samples were destroyed by the actual analysis process.
"There is no tissue stored on site today and the practice of taking samples for radiological analysis ceased in 1992.
"We will consider with the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority any information we have and will discuss with other interested parties in order to agree a way forward."
Clearly the first thing to be done is to establish exactly what did happen, and whether proper permission was given for it.
Comments