Debate contribution: Endometriosis Care
Debate contribution by Mr Alan Robinson on .
- MLA
- Mr Alan Robinson
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 29 September 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- Endometriosis Care
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5139429
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Data suggests that one in 10 women in Northern Ireland is affected by the condition. From my maths, that translates as approximately 96,000 women living with a condition that currently has no cure. The figures are very similar to the UK average. It is further estimated that around 200 million women worldwide are affected, yet endometriosis remains one of the most common conditions that women face without its attracting the high-profile public attention that other conditions tend to attract. The problem with endometriosis is with the diagnosis. It is shocking that it can take eight or nine years from the onset of symptoms for a woman to receive a formal diagnosis. In Northern Ireland, that is compounded by already-long waiting lists, with some patients even reporting that their symptoms have been misdiagnosed for many years. There is no specialist centre operating in the Province, so the problem is compounded even further. Any delay in receiving a diagnosis can lead to worsening symptoms, permanent organ damage and even infertility. There is no doubt that endometriosis is a chronic and debilitating condition that has profound physical, emotional and social implications for those who are affected. It is a disease — I have to be graphic — in which tissue, similar to the lining of the uterus, grows outside the uterus, often on the ovaries, the fallopian tubes or the bowel. That tissue tends to behave as it would inside the uterus — it thickens, breaks down and often bleeds — but it has no way to exit the body, so it can cause severe inflammation, scar tissue formation, adhesions and often extreme pelvic pain. Anxiety and depression are said to be very common amongst those living with the condition due to the constant pain and the frustration of trying to obtain a diagnosis. Women with the condition suffer from intense chronic pain that can make everyday activities, such as work, socialising and even basic self-care, feel impossible. Those symptoms can lead to absenteeism from work and school, which, in turn, has an obvious impact on the economy. Research tends to show that excision surgery, which involves the removal of tissue, is the most effective treatment for women with the condition, offering them better long-term outcomes. It is clear that specialist care is key to managing the condition effectively, and that the current system in Northern Ireland falls far short of offering the required levels of specialist service. Women who are affected want to see investment in the creation of specialist clinics to provide expert care. In areas of the UK, including Scotland and Wales, accredited specialist care has been shown to improve outcomes, including better public awareness. As with the issue of the chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cells that we debated last week, Northern Ireland should not be left behind. As I said in last week's health debate, we have some of the very best hospitals; in fact, some are world class. We also have world-class staff. We should, therefore, be on a par with the very best. Given the importance of the issue, we felt that the original motion was a little bit narrow in scope. Although we support cross-border cooperation, we need to ensure that women have the best care here locally, wherever and however possible.
546 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 (0.96).
- 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 | 0.03 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.96 | 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 | 0.68 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.24 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.04 |
| Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits | 0.04 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 13:18 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.