Debate contribution: Deaths, Still-Births and Baby Loss Bill: Second Stage
Debate contribution by Miss Jemma Dolan on .
- MLA
- Miss Jemma Dolan
- Party at the time
- Sinn Féin
- Date
- 7 April 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Executive Committee Business
- Heading
- Deaths, Still-Births and Baby Loss Bill: Second Stage
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4890931
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I welcome the progress of the Bill, which will make permanent the temporary relaxations for registering a death or stillbirth that were introduced during the pandemic and will enable the creation of a baby loss certificate scheme. The electronic transfer of documentation is something that many of us take for granted in the workplace and in our personal life. While the changes were initially necessitated by COVID-19, they are now considered to be a normal registration process and have been viewed as positive by stakeholders, the public and funeral directors. The development of a baby loss certificate scheme will give families the opportunity to get formal recognition of their heartbreaking loss and will send a clear message to parents who have lost a baby prior to 24 weeks that their love and grief are real and they are not alone. The introduction of baby loss certificates will be not merely a bureaucratic change but a compassionate acknowledgement of the profound loss experienced by parents. Ensuring equality for registering births and stillbirths for same-sex couples is also an important aspect of the Bill and will ensure that they can register in the same manner as opposite-sex parents can. I support the Bill's progression.
202 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: 0.02 (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 (0.75).
- 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 | 0.01 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.03 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.75 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.02 | 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 | 0.92 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.07 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.01 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.00 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:20 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.