Hansard

I have pleasure in opening the debate on the motion in my name. I thank colleagues for supporting the motion and for being present. In particular, I thank the Scottish Parliament information centre for a helpful research note.

I welcome to the public gallery sufferers of endometriosis, their families and their friends. It is good to have them here with us.

I have a broad political point to make for the last debate before the recess. It is a point in support and defence of our Parliament. By our Parliament, I mean not just the Parliament of the MSPs, but the Parliament of our visitors in the gallery and of people beyond. The point is that, this evening, we are debating in Edinburgh the condition endometriosis. Before 29 May 2001, I could not have told you what that was. I had never heard of it. I do not suffer from it. However, on 29 May I received an e-mail from two constituents—a husband and wife—that detailed the condition. It sounded deeply unpleasant, is clearly not well known and apparently affects 1.4 per cent of women of child-bearing age in Scotland. The age group of women between 25 and 44 is particularly susceptible.

I wondered about lodging a parliamentary question, but then I thought, "No. Lodge a motion for debate and find out whether more MSPs can be involved, whether we can address points to the minister and perhaps open up the debate." Here we are, less than a month later, doing just that. Without a Scottish Parliament, that would have been impossible. I hope that our visitors, whatever their political beliefs, feel involved, noticed and relevant. I also hope that they realise that they have triggered the accessibility, accountability and responsiveness that the Parliament is intended to demonstrate. That seems a good footnote for the end of our second year.

The dictionary definition of endometriosis is:

"A condition in which tissue more or less perfectly resembling the uterine mucous membrane (the endometrium) and containing typical endometrial granular and stromal elements occurs aberrantly in various locations in the pelvic cavity."

We may not feel much the wiser after that. The reality of the condition for many women of child-bearing age is pain, possible bleeding, acute discomfort before and during menstruation, and in some instances symptoms of irritable bowel syndrome, lethargy and even infertility. All that is accompanied by all the embarrassment and discomfiture that such an unpleasant condition induces.

The only compensation for getting on a bit is that the condition will usually disappear with the menopause. The only certain diagnosis is by a laparoscopy or, occasionally, by a laparotomy, which is a major operation and a very intrusive piece of surgery. The treatment for the condition—treatment, not cure—is principally either hormonal or surgical, but complementary medicine can also play a role.

I realise that many members want to speak, and it is not for me to outline the details of the condition and its many facets and forms. I am sure that other members will be able to give much more competent and personal contributions in that respect.

I will set out what it is important for this debate to achieve. I would welcome the minister's comments on how we bring a focus to tackling endometriosis in Scotland. I have ascertained—largely by e-mail, but I have spoken to one of them—from general practitioners that there is an awareness of the condition but that there is an acceptance that it is a difficult one.

I suggest to the minister that we consider some of the issues involved. That would raise public awareness of this unpleasant disease and, I hope, serve as a constructive influence in trying to widen the debate and assist with a more strategic attitude towards how we deal with it.

One question that springs to mind is whether we can assist GPs with training. Could we formulate guidelines, to aid diagnosis? That might help many women who know that they are suffering, but who have no idea what is affecting them. Perhaps we could instigate a specialist referral procedure. Could we perhaps build on the work of the health department's chief scientist office, which has already done excellent work in Scotland and has a database on the condition? We could perhaps also develop a national framework for the treatment of the disease in Scotland.

I have a message to women in Scotland: do not be put off going to the doctor because of shyness, self-consciousness or embarrassment. Help can be provided, and the most important thing is for that help to be obtained when it is needed. Many of the unpleasant, debilitating and painful consequences of the condition can be alleviated to some extent.

I hope that by having this debate this evening we will make our contribution to the broadening of awareness and to a more informed debate about the disease: let us hope that the Parliament can be the instrument for delivering more help to those who are afflicted by it.