Member's statement: Medical Hair Loss: Treatment Benefit Scheme
Member's statement by Ms Aoife Finnegan on .
- MLA
- Ms Aoife Finnegan
- Party at the time
- Sinn Féin
- Date
- 23 June 2025
- Type
- Member's statement
- Business
- Members' Statements
- Heading
- Medical Hair Loss: Treatment Benefit Scheme
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5045652
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I highlight my call on the Department of Health to investigate the possibility of replicating the pay-related social insurance (PRSI) scheme in the South for those in the North who suffer from medical hair loss. Whilst we are all aware of the pressures that our public services face, brought on by over a decade of savage austerity policies from Westminster, we should recognise the devastating impact that medical hair loss can have on a person's confidence, mental health and overall quality of life. In the South, if a person suffers from a medical condition such as alopecia or hair loss brought on by chemotherapy, their GP can sign a PRSI health certificate that allows them to claim up to €500 towards the cost of a wig, hairpiece or scalp treatment. Stress can have a major impact on hair loss, so the support would benefit those who already suffer hair loss from a medical condition.
The scheme provides funding to patients who have lost their hair through illness, including alopecia, and cancer treatments to pay for wigs, hairpieces and scalp treatments with a specialist of their choice. I tabled a motion at council level, as I found it astounding that patients in the North are forced to pay so much for a hairpiece or face a lengthy waiting list for a wig. The reasons that were given previously by the Department for its decision not to support a contribution scheme for the care of individuals with medical hair loss are extremely poor, full of unsubstantiated assumptions and a remarkable lack of empathy. As someone who lives and works in a border community, it further highlights the nonsensical nature of partition, because patients who live minutes away from each other cannot access the same equality of healthcare. Therefore, I have again written to the Department of Health to urge it to look into the possibility of introducing such a scheme so that men and women in the North have the same sense of dignity and equality of care that is offered to those in the South so that they can live their lives comfortably and confidently.
354 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: 0.13 (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 (0.91).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.93).
- 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 | 0.11 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.03 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.04 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.14 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.91 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.13 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.93 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.01 |
| Adopts it | 0.06 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits | 0.86 |
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.08 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.05 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.01 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:48 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.