Debate contribution: Mother-and-baby Unit

Debate contribution by Ms Cara Hunter on .

MLA
Ms Cara Hunter
Party at the time
Social Democratic and Labour Party
Date
7 October 2025
Type
Debate contribution
Business
Private Members' Business
Heading
Mother-and-baby Unit
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 5164617

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I welcome the opportunity to speak on the motion today and thank Órlaithí for her continued work on the issue. I am in firm support of the motion, because it is about justice, health, dignity and the future of mothers and babies across the North. Giving birth can rightly be one of life's most fulfilling moments, yet, for too many, it is followed by anguish, fear and crisis. Postnatal depression, anxiety and, in extreme cases, postpartum psychosis strike swiftly without warning and without mercy. No woman should face that peril isolated and unsupported, but today, we face a glaring failure in our system. Northern Ireland remains the only part of these islands without a dedicated mother-and-baby unit. That means that, when a mother suffers a severe perinatal mental health crisis, she may be admitted to a general psychiatric ward, separated from her newborn and placed in an environment without the specialist training or facilities to meet her needs. We heard the story recently about Shelley Browne. She was admitted to a general ward and separated from her baby for five weeks — a deeply distressing example but, sadly, not unique. We also recall the tragedy of Orlaith Quinn, who died by suicide just two days after giving birth. An inquest called her death "foreseeable and preventable" and recommended the establishment of a mother-and-baby unit in Northern Ireland. Those stories, sadly, are not anecdotes to be glossed over; they are warnings, and they cry out for urgent action. Let me be clear about what, the SDLP believes, must happen. First, the Department must publish the long-overdue business case for a regional MBU, with full transparency on timescales, budgets and risk assessments. Many organisations from Action on Postpartum Psychosis, whose tireless advocacy has provided vital awareness and support for families, to Aware NI have called for immediate action. Secondly, the Department must immediately allocate capital and revenue funding, with clear delivery timelines, so that the facility moves from idea to reality. Thirdly, we must institute interim measures now. Let me be clear: such measures cannot become long-term measures, but it is vital that we take the necessary steps to support mothers and babies in the interim. Mothers in crisis must never face separation or inappropriate care while waiting for a permanent unit. One option that the Department should urgently consider is repurposing an existing empty ward as a temporary mother-and-baby unit. That option may not be perfect, but it would at least allow mothers and babies to remain together, which is so important. We have seen that done before in Exeter, where a temporary ward was successfully set up while a permanent mother-and-baby unit was being built and created. Fourthly, we need cross-jurisdictional cooperation on these important matters. Mental illness respects no border. I urge the Minister of Health to coordinate with his counterpart in Dublin to ensure that, once established, the unit can serve mothers and babies across the island as needed. Specialist mother-and-baby units have a strong evidence base. They improve clinical outcomes, reduce trauma and protect the mother-infant bond, which is so important. We know that such units save lives. The issue also exposes a wider crisis in women's health in Northern Ireland. There is no reliable record of the number of women diagnosed with postpartum psychosis or admitted to psychiatric wards in the postpartum period. We really do not know how many mothers and babies have been separated. There is no record of severe adverse incidents (SAIs) relating to maternal mental health. Perhaps most shockingly, there is no reliable record of how many women die by suicide in the year after giving birth. Data collection is truly vital when seeking to adequately address sensitive issues such as the one that we are discussing. It is unacceptable that that information is not being collected; indeed, it is unfathomable. We cannot allow bureaucratic delay, a lack of political will or poor record-keeping to stand between a suffering mother and the care that she and her baby so desperately need. Women who are already vulnerable and terrified should not be told to wait while the machinery grinds. Every mother deserves to heal in the presence of their child. Every family deserves the certainty of knowing that, should a crisis strike or arise, there is a safe, specialist and compassionate place of care in our jurisdiction. There can be no more delay or excuses. We must deliver the regional mother-and-baby unit that mothers across the region so urgently deserve. We must take immediate steps to protect mothers and babies across the island.

760 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

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 (0.98).
  • 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

Probability that each statement is true of this text (0 = no, 1 = yes). A criterion counts as met at 0.60 or above.
QuestionProbabilityMet?
Identity framing0.04No
Sectarian or communal antagonism0.02No
Cultural grievance politics0.01No
Dog-whistle messaging0.02No
Controversy escalation0.02No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.98Yes
Overall judgement0.03At or below not-flagging threshold
Context and attribution (stance)
OptionProbability
No identity-based framing (chosen)1.00
Reports or questions it0.00
Criticises or condemns it0.00
Adopts it0.00
Subject area (top five)
SubjectProbability
Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues0.47
Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits0.28
Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups0.24
No identity-related subject0.01
Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials0.00

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.

Challenge this classification