Debate contribution: ADHD Services
Debate contribution by Ms Emma Sheerin on .
- MLA
- Ms Emma Sheerin
- Party at the time
- Sinn Féin
- Date
- 9 February 2026
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- ADHD Services
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5369715
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I will speak — others have touched on it — on the link between ADHD and the mental health crisis in which we find ourselves in Ireland, particularly when it comes to the mistreatment of people with ADHD and how that affects their lives. As has been said by colleagues around the Chamber, we all have constituents who are affected by the issue. Those people are fighting to be heard and listened to. They are fighting for their lives. They fight to get a diagnosis, and, when they get it, they fight to get treatment. They fight to be taken seriously. The story of a constituent who contacted me a number of weeks ago would break your heart. He has made multiple suicide attempts throughout his life. He has had problems with substance abuse and relationship breakdown. He felt as though he was crazy and the consistent problem, but, after eventually receiving his ADHD diagnosis, everything started to slot into place. He is one of the luckier ones because he has a shared care arrangement, but he is still about £200 a month out of pocket because he has to pay for his monthly medicine reviews. Minister, I have written to you and the Northern Health and Social Care Trust about constituents with ADHD diagnoses and other comorbidities who have been told that there is no central service for ADHD in the North. We have a diagnostic service for autism, but there is no treatment support. If you were to go to a mechanic with a problem with your car, you would not just be told, "Yeah, the alternator's gone". It would not happen. Where would you go next? There is no support, service or treatment for those people. If Members will indulge me, I will read a small part of an email that I received from a constituent. My correspondent referred to numerous people whom he knew who had died by suicide and who, he believes, with the benefit of hindsight, perhaps had ADHD and could have been helped.
"The last time I decided to act on suicidal ideation was —"
and he gives the date.
"Careful planning and method was only scuppered by a random police check of the area where I had bedded myself in until it was time. A bottle of spirits and a dog lead, and a head full of thoughts going like a washing machine, was all that was needed. After a hospital visit and the care of the crisis team, I was forwarded to a psychiatrist for the first time ever. She managed to give 15 minutes of her valuable time and tell me that I had 'a touch of depression and anxiety.'"
I have had other constituents tell me that their GP told them that they had seen a rise in "TikTok diagnosis" — people telling themselves that this is what is wrong with them. People are being minimised and belittled — their serious medical conditions are treated as though they are imagined, which compounds their worries and sufferings. It is not good enough. Another constituent who was in the same position got a diagnosis privately. She then had her medication stopped and was told that she could get diazepam instead. When we treat all these things in isolation, we do not serve people properly. Members are all saying the same thing: we need to see resolution as soon as possible, because people are losing their lives as a result of this and it is not good enough.
586 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: 0.04 (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 (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 | 0.05 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.03 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.03 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.92 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.04 | 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 | 1.00 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.00 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
| Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 14:33 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.