Debate contribution: Mental Illness: Reducing Stigma
Debate contribution by Miss Órlaithí Flynn on .
- MLA
- Miss Órlaithí Flynn
- Party at the time
- Sinn Féin
- Date
- 21 January 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- Mental Illness: Reducing Stigma
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4749645
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I beg to move
Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle.
I am conscious that we had a debate in the Chamber yesterday about autism and mental health services. The intention behind today's motion is to raise awareness of the stigma and unfair challenges that many people who have a diagnosable mental illness often face. I am probably preaching to the choir, because the Minister who is in post has been a champion for mental health for many years. I know that from working alongside him in my time as an MLA. Stigma, prejudice and discrimination against people with mental illness can be, at times, very subtle and, at others, very obvious, but, no matter the magnitude, they can and do lead to harm. People with mental illness are marginalised and discriminated against in various ways, but understanding what that looks like, how to address it and, importantly, how to eradicate it can help.
Therefore, this motion is, hopefully, an important step in tackling the problem of calling out stigma.
The design of the motion came directly from people who have that type of lived experience. A group of service users had hoped to be here for the debate, but, sadly, because our timings have moved ahead of schedule, they might miss all of it. For anyone in the Chamber who has an interest in this topic, some service users will be in the Great Hall at 1.00 pm today, and you are more than welcome to pop out and say hello to them and get a wee chat with them. As I said, they are the people who designed the motion and who wanted it to be debated publicly today in the Assembly Chamber. Feel free to pop out to the Great Hall at 1.00 pm. It is exactly those types of people who deserve to have their voices and their experiences heard clearly in the Assembly. While the focus of the debate is on those who are living with mental illness, it is important to state, in the context of stigma and how it affects people, that it also impacts on every type of mental health disability, whether it is people living with autism, which we debated yesterday, or people living with a learning disability, physical disability, trauma or, indeed, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, PTSD or eating disorders. They all experience social challenges that are directly caused by the stigma that they face. Stigma is a horrible thing. Stigma is real, it is rife, and it is being felt, sadly, by many people who are living with a mental illness. It lacks understanding, and it promotes social exclusion, loneliness, isolation, hopelessness and shame. It can and does create a reluctance for those who are the victims of stigma to ask for further help or seek treatment. The impact that it has on those living with a mental illness can be debilitating, and it can be dangerous. Put yourself in the shoes of someone who may already be struggling to come to terms with a mental illness diagnosis, someone who may already be struggling to make it through their day, and who then experiences a situation where they are made fun of or where someone passes a negative comment under their breath or even just gives a strange look. Just imagine any simple scenario that can and does take place daily for people who are mentally ill. They are simply made to feel different. Why? Because they do not live a "normal life" like the rest of us. For me, that type of stigma can often only be understood or felt if it is experienced at first hand, either where you have been a victim of it or where you have witnessed that type of discrimination against a loved one. I think that it is difficult for each of us individually to reflect on that, because I think that you always assume that you would never be the person to make someone else feel that way — you would never be the person to try to make someone feel discriminated against or stigmatised — but it is so easily done. I said earlier that it can be so subtle, and it can be so subtle that sometimes people do not even realise that they are doing it. My own lived experience is through family members who have been diagnosed with quite serious mental illnesses. One of them is around the same age as me and is such a beautiful person, so kind and so gentle. However, he really struggles to live with his diagnosis. When I am out with him, I can see that, in a lot of cases, people do not mean it, but stigma is there, and that is why I am saying that it is rife. If we open our eyes to it and if we notice it, I think that we all have a responsibility to try to acknowledge it and also be aware of our own prejudices, which, sometimes, we do not even know exist. We all have a responsibility to challenge any discrimination and stigma that we might witness or any negative comments that we might hear. We have to send out a united message that discriminating against, stigmatising and shaming, whether we mean to or not, people who are living with an mental illness is wrong. As elected representatives, we share a responsibility to listen to those with lived experience of mental illness, champion their needs and promote education and general awareness through public campaigns. We should not accept such biased attitudes as the norm in the modern-day world, as they are, at the very least, hurtful, and, at the very worst, harmful, to some of the most vulnerable groups of people. The first step towards making a societal change is to bring awareness to unwanted behaviour or attitudes, which is the intention of the motion. The service users and the people who have that lived experience can, hopefully, watch the debate back, because, as I said, some of them are missing it. Hopefully, when they listen to everyone's remarks throughout the debate, they can take a bit of comfort in seeing that we care and that we are trying to raise awareness and call out the stigma and negative attitudes towards them, because those are wrong. To finish, the motion calls for awareness campaigns, which are in the first theme of the mental health strategy, to be delivered as part of what we can do to try to help stamp out stigma and discrimination. All those points were covered yesterday in the discussion on the challenges in the Health budget in the context of autism and specialist mental health services. We might have the same conversations today; we are having the same conversations in the Health Committee every week. All that having been said, I get it. The Minister does not have a blank cheque to sign off to have a big advertising campaign on the issue. However, even if the message coming from the Minister and Members to the people whom we are speaking about today were that we are giving a commitment to make the matter a priority — I know that that means nothing until it is actually delivered — and if we were in the space of having three-year Budgets and with additional money — please, God — coming from the British Government, this is something that the Minister of Health might, hopefully, be able to prioritise and push forward. I know that it would be really appreciated by the people who designed the motion.
1,267 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 (0.68).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.86).
- 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 | 0.08 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.01 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.04 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.68 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.03 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.86 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.14 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits | 1.00 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.00 |
| 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 11:47 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.