Debate contribution: Deaths, Still-Births and Baby Loss Bill: Second Stage
Debate contribution by Miss Deirdre Hargey on .
- MLA
- Miss Deirdre Hargey
- 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 4890951
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I thank the Minister for bringing to the House the Second Stage of this important Bill, which will see the enabling of a baby loss scheme and the production of a certificate to recognise loss prior to 24 weeks. As has been said by other Members, this is an important issue. It is welcome that we are discussing it here today. It is extremely important to those families who have experienced loss. We have heard their stories, and we have heard their ask for their sense of loss to be recognised. This legislation is a commitment to provide just that: an official recognition of the loss that they have felt. I welcome the Minister's commitment today to engage as part of this process with the families and with the organisations that have campaigned for this change and, indeed, to engage through the Finance Committee. As the Deputy Chair said, we will do a call for evidence. We will listen to all the issues, concerns and complexities and try to craft the proper type of legislation that really meets the needs. I welcome the making of COVID provisions permanent. As Members know from the information available, we see over 17,000 deaths and 75 stillbirth deaths registered, on average, each year. This change in the legislation will allow for those important documents to be done electronically. Again, we heard today how important it is that, when someone is going through a bereavement, the last thing that they want to be doing is traipsing down to council offices or trying to go to the different practitioners to allow that death to be registered. If we can continue the seamless transition to those documents being done electronically, that is the right thing to do. I welcome the Minister's move to see same-sex female couples achieving equality in this scheme and allowing joint registration to take place. That inequality is an important unintended consequence of previous legislation, and an inequality is being rectified through the Bill. Again, I welcome the Second Stage of the Bill, and I look forward to working with my colleagues on the Finance Committee to ensure that we can progress this as urgently as possible and that we look at it in depth to ensure that we get legislation that is fit for purpose.
383 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 (0.77).
- 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 | 0.05 | 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 | 0.77 | 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 |
|---|---|
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.94 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.06 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.00 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 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.