Debate contribution: Mother-and-baby Unit
Debate contribution by Ms Sian Mulholland on .
- MLA
- Ms Sian Mulholland
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 7 October 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- Mother-and-baby Unit
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5164611
Read the official Assembly record
Text
It is lovely to hear a nod to how motherhood can be joyful and fulfilling. That sometimes gets lost in these discussions. I thank Ms Flynn for recognising it. I speak as a mummy of three, who was one of the one in five, and also as an MLA for North Antrim, where too many mothers face this time with fear rather than joy because specialist help is either too far away, too hard to reach or simply not there at all. In February 2024, I used my maiden speech in the House to highlight the lack of an MBU; in May 2024, I highlighted the issue of perinatal mental health during Mental Health Awareness Week; and, in March 2025, I engaged with the Minister about this very issue. Therefore, I look forward to hearing what has changed and what improvements have been made. Addressing perinatal mental health is not just about adequate medical care; it is about ensuring that mothers and their babies receive compassionate, comprehensive support during such a vulnerable time, and there has to be equity with what is available in other regions. The motion is simple, humane and about human beings, so I will ground my contribution to the debate in lived experience, about which I have already engaged with the Minister. I have a constituent called Laura who gave birth to a healthy baby girl in February 2023. Two days later, she was detained to a general psychiatric ward. She would not spend a full night at home with her daughter for over seven weeks. On the ward, communication was fragmented. So many teams were involved that it was often unclear who was responsible for the decision-making, who could authorise visits and who could tell Laura whether she could take a short walk outside.
Visits with her baby were supervised, limited to one hour and sporadic; they were not routine. That is not how to help a mother bond with her child, especially a mother who is in the grip of a mental health crisis.
Breastfeeding became an exhausting obstacle course. She had a lack of access to sterile pumps, no proper storage and no process for accessing basic equipment. At one point, Laura was sterilising her own kit in a staff microwave, albeit whilst being supervised. She had to call the trust breastfeeding support team herself to get help during visiting hours. She was given the wrong supplements, or her supplements were forgotten on medication rounds, because they just did not think of the postpartum supplements that a mother needs. The physical recovery expected after birth, such as having access to a bath to help with healing and cleaning, a bin to dispose of used maternity pads and a clean space to change, became just a series of indignities, but Laura said that the hardest part of being separated from her baby was that it directly harmed her recovery. She struggled to build an emotional connection and learn the day-to-day skills of caring for her newborn. She felt that she did not know her daughter at all and that she was not fit to be her mother. At her lowest, she even considered giving up her parental rights. That is the very opposite of what is needed to help new mums with mental health issues. Those little babies need their mums, but mums also need their babies, especially during that time. As things stand in Northern Ireland, if a mother becomes severely unwell after birth, she is likely to be admitted to a general psychiatric ward without her baby. The case for an MBU has been well established. It is evidence-based care. There has been progress, with all five health trusts now having a specialist community perinatal mental health team in place. That is a foundation that we should welcome, but mothers in crisis cannot wait for a capital project alone. Minister, from Laura's experience, the measures that they need are practical and potentially life-saving, and not all of them cost money. For example, a dedicated warded space within mental health services where postpartum mothers are not treated as an inconvenience; routine — not rationed — visits with babies; safe, private space for feeding and family contact; baby-friendly facilities embedded in the ward environment; proper breastfeeding support on wards; a single point of contact for every mother to coordinate that care and reduce anxiety; and data that counts what matters. Postpartum admissions have to be recorded. They have to be reported so that services can plan and measure progress. Standardised reporting and recording within and across trusts are key to building up a full picture. The motion is more about giving frightened new mothers the care that helps them heal and giving a tiny baby the secure bond that shapes a lifetime. Until that unit opens, we need to do everything that we can to make our existing wards kinder, safer and truly perinatal-ready, so that no mother is ever again asked to recover whilst apart from her baby.
835 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 (0.97).
- 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 | 0.97 | 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 | 0.40 |
| Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits | 0.31 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.28 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.01 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 13:21 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.