Debate contribution: Paediatric Pathology Services
Debate contribution by Mr Gerry Carroll on .
- MLA
- Mr Gerry Carroll
- Party at the time
- People Before Profit Alliance
- Date
- 13 January 2026
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- Paediatric Pathology Services
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5316346
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I thank the Members for tabling the motion. I speak with frustration because, a few years ago, I addressed this. My colleague from West Belfast on the Health Committee then and now spoke about the issue as well, so I feel frustration for those affected. I agree with others that the absence of a paediatric pathology service in the North is a complete disgrace. Since 2019, as we have heard, grieving parents who have lost babies and young children have been forced to send their loved ones to Liverpool for post-mortem examinations. That is nearly 1,000 children — almost five a week — going to and coming from England. Behind all of those statistics — it is a big enough figure — is, obviously, a family experiencing unimaginable heartbreak, as Members have stated. Essentially, it is made worse when their grief is compounded by a system that forces them to be separated from their child at the most traumatic moment of their lives.
Understandably, many families simply cannot face that unnatural and cruel process. They go without a post-mortem and without answers and are denied closure, because the Department of Health cannot provide that basic service locally — and it is a basic service. The Department is failing bereaved families.
Fundamentally, it is a workforce crisis, and there are no paediatric pathology consultants in post here, as we have heard, due to a recruitment and staffing crisis that strains services right across our health service. I note the comments from the Chair of the Health Committee, who said that we have people training in the sector who, in theory, could be supported to become consultants or a step away from that. I do not know what the Minister is doing to try to keep those trained, skilled people here. Meanwhile, families wait months, and sometimes over a year, for post-mortem reports. That is totally unacceptable. All-island collaboration, as Members from a range of parties have mentioned, offers an important way forward. The Minister has apparently had positive discussions with his counterpart in the South — I am sure that he will say something to that effect — about developing some kind of all-Ireland pathology network service. Like other Members, I would welcome an update on those discussions, but people need more than to hear about discussions or reports from discussions. They want action, and that is essential. With around 100,000 births across the island each year and a relatively small population, we should be pooling resources, sharing expertise and making sure that no family faces the unnecessary trauma of lengthy travel and separation. Collaboration alone is not enough. We need properly funded local services. As other Members have said, the so-called temporary arrangements with Alder Hey Hospital have been in place for six years. That is anything but temporary: it is moving towards permanent. It has become the new normal, and it is completely and totally unacceptable. We urgently need investment in infrastructure, training, recruitment and fair pay for all healthcare workers to restore local services. In the meantime, the Department needs to develop sustainable all-island provision. Families here deserve better. They deserve compassionate care close to home, timely answers and support networks that they can access without travelling across the Irish Sea. They are not getting that as things stand. They have not been getting that for the past six years. Our bereaved families have waited far too long already. The Minister has to publish a comprehensive implementation plan with concrete timelines and invest in the restoration of this essential service, otherwise I fear that families will be failed for a further six or seven years or for generations to come. I support the motion.
616 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 (0.96).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- 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 | 0.96 | 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 |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 0.90 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.05 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.02 |
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.01 |
| Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits | 0.01 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 14:18 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.