Good question I never even considered this before - but remeber the RA is not only for the worker but also the unborn child. If they were to alledge that the work activity had affected the child (unlickly unless they were exposed to certain chemicals/biological agents) they may have until the childs 21st birthday to put in a claim.

Originally Posted by: HSSnail

Good question I never even considered this before - but remeber the RA is not only for the worker but also the unborn child. If they were to alledge that the work activity had affected the child (unlickly unless they were exposed to certain chemicals/biological agents) they may have until the childs 21st birthday to put in a claim. 

I love statements that open huge cans of worms.

Based on this argument it is not only an expectant mother who would require an RA but anybody capable of procreation by natural or assisted means i.e. any gamete donor.

Then you have all those hazard classifications getting wider and wider as the science develops so that what was once harmless attracts a category of concern or an existing hazardous substance acquires additional classification(s).

Just how far back does someone need to play a major game of catch-up through the historical records of past employees in light of new information (22 years? pregnancy plus 21 years old), and when they do what should they tell them?

BY example:

How many retail outlets considered that Bisphenol A as a colour developer in thermal receipt papers would become identified as an endocrine disruptor? How many bothered with a pregnancy assessment for working on a check-out? How many have gone back through their records? And desite the fact 2020 saw a ban on BPA in receipt papers how many switched to the next nearest alternative (with similar effects)?

Someone once suggested an exposure passport for employees - great for those susbtances identified at that point in time as detrimental to health, not well enough contemplated for when the information gets updated.

Pension providers have an uphill battle just keeping addresses up to date.

Of course we can keep records forever in the cloud - problem is that if society are sincere about net zero and climate goals eventually we will need to stop profuse uncontrolled electric filing (but then who decides what is and is not relevant to be able to access in the future?).

Dont forget what the regulation acutualy says

Risk assessment in respect of new or expectant mothers

16.—(1) Where—

(a)the persons working in an undertaking include women of child-bearing age; and

(b)the work is of a kind which could involve risk, by reason of her condition, to the health and safety of a new or expectant mother, or to that of her baby, from any processes or working conditions, or physical, biological or chemical agents, including those specified in Annexes I and II of Council Directive 92/85/EEC(1) on the introduction of measures to encourage improvements in the safety and health at work of pregnant workers and workers who have recently given birth or are breastfeeding,

So its clear its not just about when the woman becomes pregnant but also the leadup to pregnancy. However i dont think you can backdate the assessment to take into account new scientific Knowledge - only take action if that factor was known and ignored.