Debate contribution: Conversion Practices

Debate contribution by Ms Emma Sheerin on .

MLA
Ms Emma Sheerin
Party at the time
Sinn Féin
Date
4 June 2024
Type
Debate contribution
Business
Opposition Business
Heading
Conversion Practices
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 4494449

Read the official Assembly record

Text

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I support the motion and welcome the opportunity for the debate. Obviously, a similar motion was supported by the House in April 2021, so we know its position on harmful conversion therapy, and we know that the majority of MLAs in the Chamber support a ban, which is to be welcomed. I remind Members that an awful lot of the work has already been done, so it is time for action here. When my party colleague Deirdre Hargey was in the Department, she carried out an awful lot of the research on conversion therapy. A lot of that has already been done, and what we need now is action. This is really about protecting people's human rights. Everybody has the right to a life free from harassment, and we all should prioritise that. We have a responsibility to protect our most vulnerable. We know, as the proposer of the motion outlined, that the LGBTQI+ community has been marginalised, ostracised and physically and verbally discriminated against by successive Governments here and across the world. We need to change that, and this is one step in doing so. Conversion therapy and everything that surrounds it legitimise homophobia. It tells people that they are wrong simply for being who they are. None of us should want to associate ourselves with that. We should outlaw it. We should tell people clearly, particularly our young gay people, that we do not want it to continue, that they are valid and that they have the same rights as anyone else and should be free to live their life as who they are. Sinn Féin has made it clear where it stands on the issue. We want to see this progressed. This is a time for action, and we want to see that happen without delay.

306 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: 0.08 (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 (0.71).
  • The text criticises or condemns the framing or division (0.73).
  • 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 framing0.19No
Sectarian or communal antagonism0.02No
Cultural grievance politics0.06No
Dog-whistle messaging0.02No
Controversy escalation0.08No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.71Yes
Overall judgement0.08At or below not-flagging threshold
Context and attribution (stance)
OptionProbability
No identity-based framing0.26
Reports or questions it0.00
Criticises or condemns it (chosen)0.73
Adopts it0.01
Subject area (top five)
SubjectProbability
Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues1.00
No identity-related subject0.00
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 10:36 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