Debate contribution: Baby Loss Certificate Scheme

Debate contribution by Mr John O'Dowd on .

MLA
Mr John O'Dowd
Party at the time
Sinn Féin
Date
1 June 2026
Type
Debate contribution (made as a minister)
Business
Oral Answers to Questions
Heading
Baby Loss Certificate Scheme
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 5581320

Read the official Assembly record

Text

More than 1,100 people and organisations took the time to respond during the consultation process. I have also met representatives of Sands and the Little Forget Me Nots Trust. Those organisations provide support to families after the loss of a baby. Alongside work with those organisations, my officials ran a concerted social media campaign to encourage widespread engagement with the public consultation. They also held several stakeholder events to collect the opinions of those who provide specialist services and support to anyone who has been impacted on by such a loss.

91 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not flagged”.

  • Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.02 (flagging needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not flagged).
  • None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
  • No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
  • The overall probability was at or below the not-flagging threshold.

This is an AI-generated assessment of the text, made against published criteria. It is not a finding of fact about the MLA or their intentions. The Assembly record itself is the fact.

Jev’s structured answers

Probability that each statement is true of this text (0 = no, 1 = yes). A criterion counts as met at 0.60 or above.
QuestionProbabilityMet?
Identity framing0.02No
Sectarian or communal antagonism0.01No
Cultural grievance politics0.01No
Dog-whistle messaging0.01No
Controversy escalation0.02No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.25No
Overall judgement0.02At or below not-flagging threshold
Context and attribution (stance)
OptionProbability
No identity-based framing (chosen)1.00
Reports or questions it0.00
Criticises or condemns it0.00
Adopts it0.00
Subject area (top five)
SubjectProbability
No identity-related subject0.60
Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues0.33
Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits0.05
Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups0.01
Another identity-related subject0.01

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 15:45 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.

Disagree with this assessment?

Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification