Motion or amendment: Mother and Baby Unit - Amendment 3
Motion or amendment by Mr Gerry Carroll on .
- MLA
- Mr Gerry Carroll
- Party at the time
- People Before Profit Alliance
- Date
- 3 October 2025
- Type
- Motion or amendment
- Business
- Motion Amendment · Private Members' Motion · to “Mother and Baby Unit”
- Heading
- Mother and Baby Unit - Amendment 3
- Assembly identifier
- Document 452866
Read the official Assembly record Open Data source
Text
Mother and Baby Unit - Amendment 3
Leave out all after ‘establishment of a mother and baby unit;’ and insert:
‘including a timeline for delivery; further calls on the Minister to work with his Executive colleagues to allocate ringfenced funding for the unit; and calls on the Minister to put in place interim measures, including a dedicated ward with staff trained in conditions such as postpartum psychosis, to ensure mothers in crisis can access appropriate support until that unit is developed, and to engage with his Ministerial counterpart in the Department of Health in Dublin to ensure that services in that unit will be available to support mothers and babies throughout Ireland.’
112 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: 0.06 (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 (0.96).
- 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 | 0.04 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.01 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.05 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.96 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.06 | 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 | 0.58 |
| Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits | 0.21 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.15 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.06 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 09:13 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.