Debate contribution: Schools: Resilience and Self-worth
Debate contribution by Mr Paul Givan on .
- MLA
- Mr Paul Givan
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 18 November 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Oral Answers to Questions
- Heading
- Schools: Resilience and Self-worth
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5244297
Read the official Assembly record
Text
The Member raises an important point. This morning, I met three dads whose daughters committed suicide — took their own lives. The challenge that they presented to me was what was being done in schools to talk about those serious issues when it comes to mental health and well-being but also addressing suicidal ideation. I was very much struck by the testimony of those three dads, who spoke about their three daughters who tragically lost their lives due to suicide. During the meeting, I was able to relay some of the work that we do carry out in Education and Health. There is a framework in place, and support is available. The Member rightly highlights the fact that the learning for life and work aspect of the curriculum does not provide the necessary support for young people. That is why Lucy Crehan, in her independent review of our curriculum, found that it was not effective and recommended that it should be broken up and that there should be a clearer way in the curriculum to provide support in a number of areas that LLW had addressed, including the well-being of young people. I gave an assurance to those three dads this morning about what I very much want to happen. As part of the review of that subject, there is a subject working group, as is the case with all subjects. As part of the curriculum review that is being established, practitioners are being appointed to provide support across every subject, including LLW. Mental health, well-being and suicide should be part of the work of the subgroup that is looking at that aspect of our curriculum, because I believe that we need to do more in that area. I will give close attention to that.
295 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 (0.90).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- Subject area: Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits.
- 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 | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.90 | 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 |
|---|---|
| Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits | 0.88 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.09 |
| Education structures, integration and community division | 0.02 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.01 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 13:56 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.