Member's statement: Turning Pain into Policy Conference
Member's statement by Ms Aoife Finnegan on .
- MLA
- Ms Aoife Finnegan
- Party at the time
- Sinn Féin
- Date
- 1 December 2025
- Type
- Member's statement
- Business
- Members' Statements
- Heading
- Turning Pain into Policy Conference
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5268568
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Last month, I had the privilege of taking part as a panellist in the 'Turning pain into policy: united against gender-based violence' conference in Limerick hosted by Sinn Féin MEP Kathleen Funchion. It brought together survivors, front-line workers, academics and policymakers from across the island, all of whom were united in the same mission: ending violence against women and girls. The testimonies that were shared were courageous, heartbreaking and painfully familiar. They were a reminder that ending violence against women and girls is not an abstract policy theme; that violence is lived trauma, affecting women and children in every county, every class and every community. Their voices must shape every decision that we make in the Assembly. Throughout the discussion, several gaps came up time and again. The chronic lack of secure and affordable housing means that too many people are forced to leave their homes while the perpetrators remain undisturbed. That balance is not only unjust but dangerous. The barriers created by partition mean that women living on the border face inconsistent protections, fragmented services and gaps in justice between North and South. Abuse does not respect borders, but, too often, our systems still do. Last but by no means least, there was the urgent need to reform family courts. Outdated cultures and practices continue to allow courts to be used as weapons and tools for control, intimidation and re-traumatisation. The children's well-being must finally come first. Their voices must be heard, and their safety must be non-negotiable. Of course, there is also the response that victims receive when they first reach out for help, especially to the PSNI. Too often, the police respond to domestic abuse as single, isolated incidents, but coercive control is defined in the Domestic Abuse and Civil Proceedings Act 2021 Act as a pattern of behaviour and a deliberate erosion of autonomy and safety.
When agencies fail to look at the overall pattern, perpetrators simply continue their abuse, often using the very agencies that are meant to protect victims as new tools of harassment. We have many dedicated police officers who do exceptional work, and I acknowledge them, but they must be supported with trauma-informed, pattern-focused training, so that victims know that they will be believed, understood and protected. As we mark 16 Days of Activism against Gender-based Violence, we must be honest that gender-based violence is a societal crisis. It recognises no border and requires an all-island response, shared data, shared learning and shared will. The theme of the conference was turning pain into policy. Let us honour that by turning what we have heard into action — urgent, coordinated and sustained — until women and children across this island are safe.
449 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: 0.05 (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 (0.92).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.97).
- 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 | 0.06 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.03 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.04 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.92 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.05 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.97 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.03 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.75 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.25 |
| 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 14:02 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.