Debate contribution: Deaths, Still-Births and Baby Loss Bill: Final Stage

Debate contribution by Mr Eóin Tennyson on .

MLA
Mr Eóin Tennyson
Party at the time
Alliance Party
Date
2 December 2025
Type
Debate contribution
Business
Executive Committee Business
Heading
Deaths, Still-Births and Baby Loss Bill: Final Stage
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 5271840

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I, too, welcome the opportunity to contribute to the Final Stage debate on the Deaths, Still-Births and Baby Loss Bill. Too often in our society, baby loss has been met with silence or stigma, and, for many parents, it is one of the most traumatic experiences of their life. Today is therefore a truly significant day, as the Assembly legislates for the first time to offer people voluntary and formal acknowledgement of the loss of a baby before 24 weeks. I pay tribute to the women, the bereaved parents and families, the charities and the organisations that have long campaigned for change and to those who bravely and courageously shared their personal testimony with the Committee and the Department during the scrutiny of the Bill. I pay particular tribute to Nikcollette and Louise from the Little Forget Me Nots Trust in my consistency whose insight was absolutely invaluable. I hope that today can be a first step, because, although acknowledgement is important, it was clear from speaking to bereaved parents that they also want to see improvements in women's health and maternal healthcare and to see us make progress on things such as a women's health strategy to ensure that bereaved parents are supported through every step of their journey. As other Members have said, throughout the scrutiny of the Bill, including Committee Stage, there was a perhaps unusual degree of political consensus and unanimity. Even where there were differences of opinion on things such as charging and cost, we were able to set aside the politics and find consensus and common ground. That is an example of how the Assembly ought to function at all times: parties come together and work together, focus on the common interest and the people whom we represent and find ways through our differences where they arise. As Members have also said, the Bill makes other important provisions that modernise the registration process. That will make a real, tangible difference to families in times, good and bad, when they have to visit a registration office to register a birth, a death or a stillbirth. The Bill includes a welcome provision that updates the Civil Registration Act (Northern Ireland) 2011 to enable a second female parent to register a stillbirth without the mother being present. That is a very small but, for those families, hugely significant act of equality. It is a signal of dignity, equality and fairness, and I am very proud that parties have been able to come together to get to this stage and to pass the Bill today. I close by paying tribute to and thanking the other members of the Finance Committee — we worked unusually well together on the Bill — and the Minister and his officials for their engagement. It was appreciated, and it aided the passage of the Bill, which I am really pleased to see here today, so thank you.

484 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: 0.02 (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).
  • 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 antagonism0.01No
Cultural grievance politics0.01No
Dog-whistle messaging0.01No
Controversy escalation0.02No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.48No
Overall judgement0.02At 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 issues0.84
Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups0.15
No identity-related subject0.01
Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials0.00
Parades, bonfires and commemorations0.00

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 14:06 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