Debate contribution: Paediatric Pathology Service: Update
Debate contribution by Mr Mike Nesbitt on .
- MLA
- Mr Mike Nesbitt
- Party at the time
- Ulster Unionist Party
- Date
- 10 March 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Oral Answers to Questions
- Heading
- Paediatric Pathology Service: Update
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4841279
Read the official Assembly record
Text
It is important for any parent going through the terrible experience of losing a child to have the option of a post-mortem examination to help to provide answers about their loss and that, if they decide to proceed, they are fully supported at all stages of the process. Members will be aware that the current service for hospital-consented post-mortems for families in Northern Ireland is provided by Alder Hey Children’s Hospital in Liverpool, and that has been the case since 3 January 2019. My first preference would be the restoration of a dedicated paediatric pathology service for Northern Ireland, but that remains incredibly challenging, I am afraid, as those services are under pressure not just across the UK but globally due to a shortage of paediatric pathologists. I remain very keen on exploring the feasibility of an all-island approach to those services in the longer term. That might mitigate the need for infant remains to be transported overseas. I had a number of conversations with Minister Donnelly about the possibility of future cooperation with the Government of Ireland on the issue. I recently raised it with the new Irish Health Minister, Jennifer Carroll MacNeill TD. While it is at the early stages of consideration, the conversations, I can report, have been positive. The Minister reiterated her agreement to take the matter forward, which will allow the feasibility of an all-island approach to be considered, but I must say that any post-mortem service is likely to take time to develop even if it is feasible. In the meantime, as those services move to more and more centralised models nationally and in the absence of any viable alternative at this time, my priority remains to ensure that bereaved parents continue to have access to a high-quality post-mortem service that provides the medical answers as well as the care and support that families need and deserve. Access has therefore been secured by a further extension of the arrangements with Alder Hey in Liverpool.
330 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 (0.92).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- 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 | 0.03 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.01 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.03 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.92 | 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 |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 0.92 |
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.05 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.02 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.01 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:03 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.