Written question AQW 50002/22-27
Written question by Ms Claire Sugden on .
- MLA
- Ms Claire Sugden
- Party at the time
- Independent
- Date
- 30 June 2026
- Type
- Written question
- Assembly reference
- AQW 50002/22-27
- Department
- Department of Health
- Business
- To the Minister of Health
- Assembly identifier
- Document 493520
Read the official Assembly record Open Data source
Text
To ask the Minister of Health, in light of the managed closure of Fertility Network UK and the uncertainty surrounding the future of the Fertility Network NI, to detail (i) any engagement his Department has had in relation to the continuation of fertility support services, including whether alternative funding or delivery arrangements have been identified; (ii) any assessment that has been made of the impact that the loss of these services would have on individuals and couples experiencing infertility; and (iii) any role his Department has in ensuring that appropriate emotional, practical and peer support services are available for fertility patients.
101 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 (0.95).
- 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
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.02 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.01 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.01 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.95 | 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 |
|---|---|
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.67 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.26 |
| Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits | 0.05 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.01 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 07:23 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.