Debate contribution: In Vitro Fertilisation Equality

Debate contribution by Miss Órlaithí Flynn on .

MLA
Miss Órlaithí Flynn
Party at the time
Sinn Féin
Date
22 June 2026
Type
Debate contribution
Business
Opposition Business
Heading
In Vitro Fertilisation Equality
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 5638489

Read the official Assembly record

Text

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle.

I support the motion, and I thank its sponsors. For many people, the journey to becoming a parent is not straightforward. Whilst some conceive without difficulty, others face years of heartbreak, uncertainty and loss. For those facing infertility, IVF and assisted treatments can offer hope when all other options have been exhausted. As someone who has undergone IVF, I know that the issue is deeply personal. I have spoken publicly about my IVF journey and the loss that I experienced along the way. Like so many others, I know the emotional impact of infertility. I know the anticipation that comes with every appointment, every scan and every phone call, and, sadly, I know about the heartbreak that there is when the treatment does not succeed. I have learned that people often talk about IVF as though it guarantees a baby. Tragically, the reality is that that is not always the case. This is not the first motion calling for three cycles of IVF that we have debated. The motion's sponsors are right that that was agreed under New Decade, New Approach and that we are lagging behind England, Scotland and Wales, where there is access to two and three rounds of IVF respectively. You never know which round is going to be your last chance, and that is if you are even lucky enough to qualify for a round of IVF, so time is precious. The journey is extremely unpredictable and filled with ups and downs. Regrettably, you cannot dictate that the outcome will be a successful pregnancy and a baby. That is why it is so important and the right thing to do to give any individual or couple that need to undergo IVF to have a baby the best possible chance.

Thank you. I completely agree: we absolutely have a two-tier system, and it is stark when it comes to IVF. There are many other examples of the two-tier system, but with IVF, where there is the potential to create a new life and have a wee baby of your own, there are, as has been said, people who can take forward that option if they have the money and others who cannot because they simply do not have the money. Of the people who are paying for it privately, I am sure that many are getting themselves into great debt by using credit cards or borrowing from family members, a credit union or wherever. That is not the space that we want to be in. Given what we are talking about — the potential of creating a new life and giving someone the opportunity to have a wee baby of their own and create their own family — we should do anything that we can do to make that process easier and doable. I know that we have to live in the real world, and there is the question of where we get the money from to expand the provision from one cycle to three. Given that the commitment was agreed in New Decade, New Approach, however, and the fact that we are at a disadvantage compared with other places across these islands, the question is how we can make it happen. I, too, welcome the women in the Public Gallery.

551 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: 0.04 (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).
  • Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.94).
  • No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
  • Subject area: Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues.
  • 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 framing0.04No
Sectarian or communal antagonism0.01No
Cultural grievance politics0.02No
Dog-whistle messaging0.02No
Controversy escalation0.03No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.94Yes
Overall judgement0.04At 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
Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues0.80
No identity-related subject0.12
Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups0.04
Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits0.03
Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy0.01

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 16:07 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