Debate contribution: Puberty Blockers

Debate contribution by Mr Robin Swann on .

MLA
Mr Robin Swann
Party at the time
Ulster Unionist Party
Date
15 April 2024
Type
Debate contribution (made as a minister)
Business
Oral Answers to Questions
Heading
Puberty Blockers
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 4482794

Text

I thank the Member. I refer him to the answer that I gave to the substantive question, which was that puberty blockers are available on NHS prescription only for under-18s who were accepted for and remain in the Belfast Health and Social Care Trust Knowing Our Identity service endocrine pathway prior to March 2020. I have been advised that that is the current stance on that piece of work, which was done following consultation with the clinical ethics committee and the Belfast Health and Social Care Trust, in liaison with the then Health and Social Care Board.

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

Assessment

Not qualifying

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

  • Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.09 (qualifying needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not qualifying).
  • None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
  • No identity-based framing was identified (0.99).
  • Subject area: Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues.
  • The overall probability was at or below the not-qualifying 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 framing0.03No
Sectarian or communal antagonism0.02No
Cultural grievance politics0.01No
Dog-whistle messaging0.03No
Controversy escalation0.03No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.53No
Overall judgement0.09At or below not-qualifying threshold
Context and attribution (stance)
OptionProbability
No identity-based framing (chosen)0.99
Reports or questions it0.01
Criticises or condemns it0.00
Adopts it0.00
Subject area (top five)
SubjectProbability
Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues0.98
No identity-related subject0.02
Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials0.00
Parades, bonfires and commemorations0.00
Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy0.00

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 09:57 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 reviews every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification