Member's statement: Baby Loss Awareness Month
Member's statement by Ms Kellie Armstrong on .
- MLA
- Ms Kellie Armstrong
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 30 September 2025
- Type
- Member's statement
- Business
- Members' Statements
- Heading
- Baby Loss Awareness Month
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5142867
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Due to the state of my voice today, I will not take too long. Tomorrow is 1 October. It is amazing how quickly the years pass by, but starting tomorrow is Baby Loss Awareness Month. I talk about it, because, as others have heard in the House, it is important to recognise the number of children who are born asleep or too early. It is important to break the silence about baby loss. I have been open about my history and my 14 children. Sadly, 13 have not made it to be with us, but I have one very special daughter, and I hold her close to my heart. However, for all the families and all those mums and dads who do not get to hold their children to their hearts but hold them in their hearts because they are not with them, it is important that, this month, we take the time to recognise the hurt and pain and the one in four pregnancies that end without a baby. It is sad that October is the month in which this happens. It is when the dark nights start to roll in and we start to think about wrapping up warm. It is the time when we want to be with family, but, for some of us who have been through baby loss, not being able to talk about that loss means that there is a silent grief that causes a lot of pain and anguish. This month, I ask you all to look to your loved ones and ask them how they are. How long has it been? What would their name be? Tell them that you are sorry for their loss. We are not alone. There are many of us out there, and we share the grief together.
300 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).
- 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 | 0.02 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.01 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.01 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.10 | No |
| 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 | 0.68 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.22 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.05 |
| Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits | 0.03 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.01 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 13:16 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.