Debate contribution: Endometriosis Care
Debate contribution by Mr Gerry Carroll on .
- MLA
- Mr Gerry Carroll
- Party at the time
- People Before Profit Alliance
- Date
- 29 September 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- Endometriosis Care
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5139458
Read the official Assembly record
Text
As we have heard, one in 10 women faces endometriosis, but the figure is likely to be much higher. The cost is some £8·2 billion every year in healthcare costs, loss of work and treatment, and that probably only scratches the surface. Some 95% of those living with endometriosis report that it has a negative impact on their well-being, and, as we have heard, it takes an average of almost 10 years — nine years and five months — to get an endometriosis diagnosis. That is completely unacceptable for all women across the North and across the board. As with many healthcare issues in the North, those who can afford it are forced to seek private healthcare for a diagnosis and treatment, while those who cannot afford to pay for private healthcare are left to suffer in silence while waiting years for even a simple ultrasound. That is unacceptable. Like other Members, I have spoken to women in my constituency whose endometriosis pain is so severe that they have been forced to go to A&E regularly and repeatedly, and some have had no choice but to give up work while waiting for treatment. That is forced unemployment. For those who suffer from debilitating symptoms, work, education, relationships and caring responsibilities are all impacted. Endometriosis has, in effect, prevented thousands of women across the North from going about their daily lives, something that we all, including me, take for granted. For hundreds of years, women's pain has been pathologised as emotional or been normalised. As a starting point, we need to challenge that idea. That concept, combined with the underfunding of women's health research and a male-centred biomedical model, has led to a decade-long wait for diagnosis. Again, that is totally unacceptable. Without diagnosis, treatment and management, endometriosis may progress and lead to organs being damaged. Thousands of patients are on gynaecology waiting lists in the North, condemned to years of unnecessary suffering. As we have heard, many women have their symptoms downplayed or dismissed; that seems to happen across the board. Some are told just to get pregnant to fix their symptoms, which is totally unacceptable. Some are incorrectly diagnosed with IBS or are even told that their pain is related to anxiety or depression. Others are passed back and forth from gynae to gastro care. That is anybody's definition of medical gaslighting and is medical misogyny at its finest. That is not to say that doctors are inherently misogynistic — definitely not. Many are doing the hard work on the ground to improve our health system for women. What it does reflect is the impact of misogyny and women's oppression in every facet of our life. It is still institutionalised and systemic in 2025. Healthcare does not exist in a vacuum. As much as it should be rooted purely in need, evidence, science and treatment outcomes, the history of healthcare is also the history of the humans who shaped it, and they were the product of the society and the conditions they lived under. The same strict gender norms, which were imposed on women and families, ensuring male dominance in society, were written into medicine. Those strict gender rules did not always exist, however, and there was a time when people lived very differently. It is also worth emphasising that medical myths about gender roles and behaviours were constructed as facts before medicine became a more evidence-based science. Those myths were fundamental to treatment. For example, doctors once believed that women's nerves were too highly strung for them to receive an education and that their ovaries would become inflamed if they read too much. Obviously, that sounds bonkers, but it is not a million miles away from what Trump, Tate and others are saying. Thankfully, even today, we know much more about gender and sexuality. It is concerning, for example, that we live in a world where menstruation and menopause are seen by many people as credible reasons why women should not get certain jobs or hold positions of power. Endometriosis exposes the rotten core of commodified healthcare, long delays in diagnosis, a lack of reliable and accessible specialist services and a two-tier healthcare system in which those who can afford to pay are charged an arm and a leg for basic scans and precarious
I am happy to support the motion and the amendment. Thank you.
728 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: 0.16 (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 (0.86).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.44).
- Subject area: Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups.
- 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 | 0.22 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.08 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.07 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.21 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.86 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.16 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.44 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.33 |
| Adopts it | 0.23 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.72 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.28 |
| 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 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.