A woman - later known as Jane in Herald stories - sees Gisborne pathologist Michael Bottrill for cervical smears. Like many other women seen by Dr Bottrill between 1990 and 1996, she is wrongly told her smears are normal.
Jane is diagnosed with cervical cancer. She has a radical hysterectomy and intense radiation therapy. She applies to ACC for damages for medical misadventure. ACC refers the case to the Medical Practitioners Disciplinary Committee.
Jane sues Dr Bottrill for gross negligence and claims exemplary damages. He retires and sells his laboratory.
1997:
The committee finds Dr Bottrill guilty of unbecoming conduct.
MARCH 1999:
Jane's case fails in the High Court. Justice Ron Young rules Dr Bottrill guilty of negligence but his actions avoided exemplary damages.
APRIL:
With secrecy still surrounding the case, Jane's lawyer Stuart Grieve, QC, writes to the Health Funding Authority, pointing out that other women could be in danger.
MAY:
Dr Bottrill waives his right to name suppression. The HFA orders 22,000 cervical slides read by Dr Bottrill to be reread.
SEPTEMBER:
The tests show Dr Bottrill may have missed 129 out of 157 slides with high-grade abnormalities.
APRIL-SEPTEMBER 2000:
A ministerial inquiry takes place in Gisborne.
MARCH 2001:
A separate report recommends one super-agency with a central database to deal with medical complaints.
The report by Helen Cull, QC, was prompted by revelations about gynaecologist Graham Parry's treatment of Colleen Poutsma, who died of cervical cancer the following month.
APRIL:
The 273-page Gisborne cervical cancer report blames both Dr Bottrill and the national cervical screening programme. It finds Dr Bottrill under-reported smear tests but that the Ministry of Health had failed to design an effective programme for a decade, which allowed Dr Bottrill's mistakes to go unchecked. The report says health officials need access to women's medical records without their consent to check if other labs have under-reported smears. But it surprises experts by not recommending a separate cancer control agency. Forty-one women, denied compensation by the inquiry, launch a $2 million lawsuit against Dr Bottrill and health officials.
JUNE:
Jane loses her bid for a retrial. The Court of Appeal rules that Dr Bottrill had not acted with "deliberate or conscious recklessness" in her case. Jane plans to appeal to the Privy Council.
OCTOBER 3:
Health Minister Annette King says the Government will implement the inquiry's key recommendations. Researchers will have access to women's records. Women will be able to opt out at any time if they do not want their details revealed.
NOVEMBER 5:
The HFA's final report shows Dr Bottrill picked up only 32 per cent of high-grade abnormalities. It emerges that compensation talks have started between the Gisborne women's lawyers and the Government.
NOVEMBER 8:
Health Minister Annette King is due to present a six-month summary of progress on implementing the report's recommendations in Gisborne.
