Written question AQW 45481/22-27
Written question by Ms Cara Hunter on .
- MLA
- Ms Cara Hunter
- Party at the time
- Social Democratic and Labour Party
- Date
- 5 May 2026
- Type
- Written question
- Assembly reference
- AQW 45481/22-27
- Department
- Department of Health
- Business
- To the Minister of Health
- Assembly identifier
- Document 483004
Read the official Assembly record Open Data source
Text
To ask the Minister of Health to detail (i) whether any assessment has been made of the adequacy of discharge planning and aftercare support for patients released from psychiatric inpatient settings; (ii) whether his Department holds data on (a) the number of individuals who have presented to Emergency Departments with self-harm or suicidal behaviour within 30 days of discharge; and (b) the proportion of those individuals who had a documented and implemented aftercare plan in place; (iii) any steps that are being taken to ensure timely access to prescribed medication following discharge, including addressing delays in prescriptions being issued to community pharmacies; and (iv) whether support services for families and carers of individuals discharged from psychiatric care are (a) routinely offered; (b) consistently delivered; and (c) subject to any monitoring or evaluation of their effectiveness.
135 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
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: 0.03 (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 (0.97).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- Subject area: Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits.
- 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
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.02 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.01 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.97 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.03 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 1.00 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits | 0.96 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.04 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
| Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 06:42 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.