Independent Medicines and Medical Devices Safety Review: Sodium Valproate Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: Department of Health and Social Care

Independent Medicines and Medical Devices Safety Review: Sodium Valproate

Lord O'Shaughnessy Excerpts
Tuesday 2nd March 2021

(3 years, 8 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Asked by
Lord O'Shaughnessy Portrait Lord O'Shaughnessy
- Hansard - -

To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the report by the Independent Medicines and Medical Devices Safety Review First Do No Harm, published on 8 July 2020, what plans they have to bring forward a redress scheme for women and families who have been harmed by sodium valproate.

Lord Bethell Portrait The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Health and Social Care (Lord Bethell) (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, the Government plan to respond further to the Cumberlege review later this year, as I committed in my recent Written Ministerial Statement. In the meantime, we are carefully considering the recommendation regarding a redress scheme for those harmed by sodium valproate, and measures are in place to limit the prescribing of this drug.

Lord O'Shaughnessy Portrait Lord O'Shaughnessy (Con)
- Hansard - -

I am grateful to my noble friend for his Answer. Since my noble friend Lady Cumberlege published her landmark review, another 150 babies have been born suffering harm from in utero exposure to sodium valproate, to add to the 18,000 children—18,000, my Lords—who have been harmed in this way since the 1970s. These children belong to families whose lives have been turned upside down, and who often cannot afford the costs of caring for their damaged children. They need and deserve a redress scheme now. Why can the Government not move faster?

Lord Bethell Portrait Lord Bethell (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, I pay tribute to those who have put together the valproate registry scheme that became live on 11 February. My noble friend is entirely right. There are 22,095 people on the registry; 462 of them had 490 conceptions, and 180 women were prescribed in a month when they were pregnant. A redress scheme is not necessarily the correct solution to this problem. We are considering it extremely carefully, and when we publish our overall response to the Cumberlege review we will include our considered response to the redress suggestion