Every time a vaccine is given, every time an anaesthetic is injected, every time a patient receives insulin, antibiotics, chemotherapy, adrenaline, morphine, or life-saving fluids through a line, there is a quiet piece of Irish history at work and it begins in Co. Dublin.
Long before modern hospitals, vaccination centres, intensive care units, emergency departments, operating theatres, and community clinics became part of everyday life, doctors faced a simple but enormous problem; how could medicine be delivered precisely into the body, beneath the skin, where it could act quickly and effectively? For much of medical history, treatments were limited by the routes available. A patient could swallow a medicine. A substance could be rubbed onto the skin. A wound could be dressed. But getting a measured treatment through the skin and into the tissues, close to the source of pain or disease, was a different challenge entirely.
Dr Francis Rynd, (1801-1861) and his hypodermic hollow needle invention.
That challenge was answered in Ireland. The late Dr Francis Rynd, (1801-1861), an Irish physician and surgeon working at the Meath Hospital in Dublin, developed a hollow needle that made hypodermic injection possible. In 1844, Rynd used his new instrument to treat a woman suffering from severe neuralgia, a crippling nerve pain that had resisted the treatments then available. Rather than relying on medicine taken by mouth, he introduced a pain-relieving solution beneath the skin, close to the affected nerves. The effect was remarkable. A patient who had been suffering intensely finally experienced relief.
It was a small procedure by modern standards, but its consequences were vast. With that act, medicine crossed a threshold. The skin was no longer an almost impenetrable barrier between doctor and disease. The body could now be reached more directly, more precisely, and often more quickly.
Dr Rynd’s newly developed instrument was not the modern disposable syringe we know today. It was a pioneering device, developed at a time when medicine was still learning how to control pain, infection, and dosage. But the principle was revolutionary; a hollow needle could carry fluid into the human body, and from that principle came a medical transformation.
Left -Right:Meath Hospital nurses photographed in 1872 and named as Fever Nurse Ms Hodgens; Night Nurse Ms Spring; Surgical Nurse Ms Murray, and Accident Nurse Ms Brazil.
Today, the hollow needle is so familiar that we often forget how extraordinary it is. It is present at birth, in childhood immunisation, in dental surgeries, in ambulances, in cancer wards, in diabetes care, in blood tests, in epidurals, in emergency medicine, in intensive care, and in operating theatres across the world.
The story became even more powerful during our recent COVID-19 pandemic. When COVID vaccines were developed and rolled out at historic speed, the world focused on the science of messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA), viral vectors, immune response, public health logistics, cold-chain storage, and global vaccine access. All of those mattered enormously. But the final act; the moment science became protection, depended on the needle. Billions of times, in clinics, pharmacies, sports halls, hospitals, GP surgeries, care homes, schools, airports, and temporary vaccination centres, a tiny hollow needle carried a vaccine from vial to arm. That simple delivery system helped protect people from severe illness and death on a scale almost impossible to imagine. Over 13 billion COVID-19 vaccine doses have been administered globally. Each one was a modern event, shaped by cutting-edge immunology, global manufacturing, public health systems, and data science. Yet each one also belonged to a much older story: the story of a Dublin doctor who showed that medicine could be placed directly beneath the skin.
The same is true of countless other vaccines. Measles. Polio. Tetanus. Diphtheria. Influenza. HPV. Hepatitis. Pneumococcal disease. Childhood immunisation programmes across the world depend on the ability to deliver vaccines safely and reliably into the body. The needle is not the whole story of vaccination, but without it modern vaccination would not look the way it does today, and that is why Francis Rynd deserves to be better known.
Ireland has given the world poets, revolutionaries, scientists, teachers, nurses, doctors, inventors, and reformers. Among them stands a Dublin physician whose invention became one of the most important tools in the history of medicine.
While most people know the feeling of a needle; very few know the name Francis Rynd. But his legacy is everywhere. It is in the child receiving a routine vaccine. It is in the older person receiving a seasonal COVID or flu booster. It is in the patient being prepared for surgery. It is in the diabetic injecting insulin. It is in the emergency doctor administering adrenaline. It is in the cancer patient receiving treatment. It is in the drip beside a hospital bed.
A hollow needle may look ordinary. In truth, it is one of the great medical inventions and it began in Ireland and the world should remember the name Dr Francis Rynd.
A Government That Protects Childhood But Discards Human Life Has Lost Its Moral Authority.
Ireland’s Government now speaks of protecting children from social media. An Taoiseach Mr Micheál Martin has called social media “the public health issue of our time,” and ministers are currently considering a ban for those aged under-16 years.
But before the State appoints itself guardian of the child, it should answer a harder question; “What value does this Irish State place on life in the first place?” This same Irish political system, that now wants to shield teenagers from algorithms, has just voted to advance the removal of the three-day waiting period before abortion. Under current Irish law, abortion is available up to 12 weeks, with a mandatory three-day wait between the first consultation and access to abortion medication. Our Dáil has now voted 86 to 70 to progress same legislation that would remove that short waiting period.
That is not a minor administrative change. It is a strong moral statement. A society that cannot tolerate even three days of reflection before ending unborn life should be very slow to lecture parents about their responsibility. A government that treats a three-day waiting period as an obstacle, while presenting social media regulation as child protection, is not showing any moral consistency. Rather it is showing moral confusion. Shame on us if we have reached the point where the unborn child is spoken of mainly as a problem to be processed instantly, while the State congratulates itself for protecting older children from their mobile phones.
This is especially hard to justify in a country where contraception is widely available and increasingly funded by the public. The HSE’s free contraception scheme covers GP consultations, prescriptions, long-acting reversible contraception such as implants and coils, the contraceptive patch and ring, oral contraceptive pills, injections, emergency contraceptionfor eligible age groups and abortion made available free through the HSE for eligible residents.
So we must ask plainly; “How did a society with so many ways to prevent conception become so casual about ending life after conception?“ This is not about denying the complexity of crisis pregnancies. It is not about lacking compassion for women in fear, in poverty, in abandonment, illness or distress. A truly pro-life society must be pro-mother, pro-family, pro-housing, pro-care, pro-disabilitysupport, pro-adoptionreform and pro-real help. But compassion cannot mean pretending there is no second life involved. Nor should compassion become a political costume worn only when same is convenient.
When it comes to social media, government says children must be protected because platforms are powerful, addictive and harmful. Fair enough. But parents cannot fight global technology companies alone. Here the Irish State has a legitimate role in regulating platforms that profit from children’s attention. But when it comes to unborn life, many of the same political voices from all political parties insist that the Irish State should step back, speed up access, remove pauses, and call such action “progress“.
The old model, where “parents decided what children watch, read, and do”, made more sense when the risks were local, visible, and interruptible; television in the sitting room, a phone line, a shop, a playground, a magazine. Social media is different because parents are not just dealing with content; they are dealing with algorithmic feeds, infinite scroll, recommendation systems, private messaging, behavioural targeting, peer pressure, age misrepresentation, and devices carried everywhere.
Coimisiún na Meán’s Online Safety Framework already reflects that shift: it says digital services must be made accountable for protecting people, especially children, from online harm. That does NOT mean Ireland is a nation of failed parents. The call for regulation is partly an admission that even good parents are being put in an unfair contest against platforms with far more data, design expertise, money, and behavioural leverage. Calling parents “failed” risks letting platforms and policymakers off the hook. To leave parents to fight the consequences individually, then to introduce State-managed verification, surveillance, and bureaucratic controls as being the remedy, is not a healthy social contract.
That contradiction is glaring.The State SHOULD NOT become the parent. Ireland’s Constitution recognises the family as the primary and natural educator of the child, and parental authority should not be casually displaced by government decree. The role of the State should be to defend the conditions in which families can flourish, through safe communities, accountable platforms, decent housing, proper healthcare, and a culture that honours life rather than managing its disposal.
But this coalition government guided by Sinn Féin, a party that supports terrorism, increasingly behaves as though family authority is optional; moral tradition is embarrassing, and life itself is negotiable. That is why the proposed under-16 social media ban should be treated with caution. Not because children do not need protection; indeed they do. Not because platforms should be left alone; they most definitely should not. But because a government that has lost moral seriousness about the beginning of life, cannot simply be trusted to become the moral guardian of childhood.
Ireland is NOT a nation of failed parents. We are a nation whose parents are being undermined from both sides: by technology companies that commercialise childhood, and by political leaders who too often replace moral responsibility with managerial control. The answer is not State parenthood, but it is NOT Silicon Valley parenthood either. The answer is a renewed culture of life and responsibility; parents first, families respected, platforms restrained, mothers supported, children protected, and unborn life recognised as something more than an inconvenience.
A government that wants to protect children online should begin by recovering reverence for children everywhere; including the child not yet born.
POINT Youth Diversion Project Opens in Thurles; as Youth Diversion Reaches Every Community in Ireland.
Ms Catherine Ardagh, TD.
Minister of State Ms Catherine Ardagh has officially opened the Providing Opportunities in North Tipperary Youth Diversion Project, known as POINT YDP, in Thurles.
The project will support young people and families across Thurles, Templemore and surrounding areas in central Tipperary.
The opening marks an important milestone for youth justice in Ireland, with Youth Diversion supports now available to children and young people nationwide. There are now 92 Youth Diversion Projects and 4 Targeted Youth Diversion Projects operating across the State.
Youth Diversion Projects play a vital role in helping young people move away from anti-social or criminal behaviour and towards positive opportunities, personal development, education, training and stronger community connections.
Speaking at the opening, Minister Ms Ardagh highlighted the life-changing impact these projects can have for young people, their families and their wider communities. She said diversion gives young people the chance to access support early, build confidence, make positive choices and avoid the long-term consequences that can come from entering the criminal justice system.
POINT YDP is administered by Foróige, Ireland’s largest youth organisation, which delivers youth services and projects across the country.
The Government has also confirmed continued investment in youth justice services, with total funding for Youth Justice measures rising to €43 million this year.
This new project is a welcome and significant development for North Tipperary, ensuring that young people in the area can access the guidance, support and opportunities they need to reach their full potential.
Ms Cindy Carroll has been announced as the first Chief Appeals Officer to the Tribunal for Asylum and Returns Appeals (TARA). TARA will manage International Protection appeals under the International Protection Act 2026 from June 12th 2026 onwards. The appointment will take effect from that date and will be for a 5-year period.
Ms Carroll has been recommended by ”publicjobs‘, following an open competition as required under legislation. There will be a period during which both TARA and the current appeals body, the International Protection Appeals Tribunal (IPAT), will operate simultaneously under separate legislative frameworks. As appeals under the 2015 International Protection legislation are progressed, IPAT will be wound down over time. All appeals made from June 12th under the International Protection Act 2026 will be dealt with by TARA.
Ms Carroll is a graduate of Law from University College Cork who was called to the Bar of Ireland in 1995. She practised as a barrister in Cork, and lectured in Cork Institute of Technology and University College Cork. This new role will be vital to the success of the new International Protection Appeals body. In 2001, Ms Carroll was appointed as Advisory Counsel Grade III in the Office of the Attorney General and worked there advising primarily on asylum and immigration law. She returned to the Bar in Dublin in early 2004 and was briefed as counsel on the State Asylum and Immigration Panel from 2004 until March 2018. In March 2018, she was appointed as Deputy Chairperson in the International Protection Appeals Tribunal, where she was head of Training and a decision maker on various types of appeals.
As part of the preparations for the EU Pact on Migration and Asylum, Ms Carroll was appointed as an acting Principal Officer in the Department of Justice, Home Affairs and Migration in July 2025 following an internal competition. This role has involved leading on the establishment of the new appeals body. In addition to her legal qualifications, Ms Carroll also holds a Post Graduate Diploma in Public Management and an MA in Leadership and Strategy.
Her appointment marks an important step in the establishment of TARA and the ongoing reform of Ireland’s international protection appeals system.
The EU Migration and Asylum Pact must be judged by one simple test: does it help Ireland and Europe manage migration in a way that is fair, humane, lawful and safe?
Compassion matters. People fleeing war, persecution and real danger should be treated with dignity. Ireland has a proud tradition of helping people in need, and that should not be abandoned. But compassion cannot mean naivety. It cannot mean weak borders, poor screening, endless delays, or communities being told to accept decisions without proper consultation. It also cannot mean ignoring the genuine fear many Irish people now feel when they see violent attacks, pressure on housing, pressure on services, and a growing sense that ordinary people are not being listened to.
Across Ireland and Northern Ireland, people have been shaken by serious crimes and brutal attacks; the murder of teacher Ashling Murphy, the horrific attack on a priest in Downpatrick, and the shocking attempted beheading attack in Belfast. These cases are not all the same, and it would be wrong to use every tragedy to blame migrants as a whole. Most migrants are not criminals, and many come here to work, contribute and live peacefully. But it would also be wrong for politicians to dismiss public concern as racism or extremism every time people ask serious questions about security, vetting, deportation, border control and community safety.
A fair migration system must protect refugees, but it must also protect the host community. That means proper identity checks, faster decisions, stronger removal of people who have no right to stay, and immediate action where anyone; be they Irish or non-Irish, poses a danger to the public.
The EU Migration Pact certainly may bring more structure to the asylum system, but structure alone is not enough. Faster procedures must still be fair. Human rights must be respected. But public safety must also be treated as a human right, because Irish people have the right to feel safe in their towns, churches, schools, streets and homes. The debate should not be reduced to two extremes. On one side, there are people who want to shut the door completely. On the other, there are people who seem unwilling to admit that uncontrolled migration creates real problems. Ireland needs neither open-door idealism nor hatred. Ireland needs balance.
That balance should be clear: We should welcome genuine refugees. We should reject racism and violence against innocent people. We should remove those who abuse the system. We should never ignore crimes that terrify communities. We should demand honesty from government instead of slogans.
The EU Migration Pact will only work if it restores trust. Trust requires fairness for asylum seekers, but also fairness for Irish citizens. Trust requires compassion, but also enforcement. Trust requires humanity, but also common sense. Migration must be managed properly. Borders must mean something. Communities must be consulted. Dangerous people must not be allowed to fall through the cracks.
Ireland can be generous, but generosity must be matched with responsibility. A humane country protects the vulnerable, and that includes both those seeking refuge and the Irish people who expect their government to keep them safe.
This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish.AcceptRead More
Privacy & Cookies Policy
Privacy Overview
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
Recent Comments