Member's statement: Ovarian Cancer Awareness Month
Member's statement by Ms Connie Egan on .
- MLA
- Ms Connie Egan
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 24 March 2026
- Type
- Member's statement
- Business
- Members' Statements
- Heading
- Ovarian Cancer Awareness Month
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5462710
Read the official Assembly record
Text
March is Ovarian Cancer Awareness Month, serving as an important reminder to step back and reflect on the realities of that tragic disease in our communities in Northern Ireland. Over 200 women in Northern Ireland are diagnosed with ovarian cancer every year. We must continue to fight for improved outcomes for all those who face it. This time last year, I stood up in the Chamber and informed Members of the staggering facts, including:
"Only 39% of women who are diagnosed here are diagnosed at an early stage."— [Official Report (Hansard), 18 March 2025, p4, col 1].
What has happened since then? Over the past year, I have worked with campaigners from Target Ovarian Cancer to change that. In November, I, alongside awe-inspiring campaigners Christine Campbell and Pauline Donnelly, presented a letter to the Health Minister, signed by 26 MLAs, to ask him to update public health information to make it clear that cervical screening will not detect ovarian cancer and signpost key symptoms. Despite sounding like a small step, that is vital, as research points to 46% of women in Northern Ireland believing that a cervical screening will detect ovarian cancer. Target Ovarian Cancer's successful lobbying means not just that that information is updated on online public health resources but that, from this month onwards, cervical screening invitation letters will be updated to highlight the fact that the tests do not screen for other gynaecological cancers and that, from this summer, a formal change will be made to patient leaflets. That is fantastic progress, but there is still so much more to be done, such as giving patients access to poly-ADP ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors, otherwise known as target treatments or maintenance treatments. Those wonderfully brave campaigners who came with me to meet the Health Minister, Christine Campbell and Pauline Donnelly, also recorded a video that went up on the Department of Health's social media last week, in which they discuss with the Health Minister their journey and the symptoms of ovarian cancer. The symptoms include persistent bloating; feeling full quickly or having a loss of appetite; pain in your tummy and pelvis; and needing to pee more often or urgently than usual. The video is really worth watching, and I encourage all those here today to share Target Ovarian Cancer's resources with their loved ones and communities. I thank all those who have campaigned for better outcomes on the disease, including my constituent Stephen, who was the first person to contact me on the issue and who kick-started much of my work.
424 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: 0.02 (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).
- Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.88).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- Subject area: Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups.
- 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 | 0.01 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.01 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.88 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.02 | 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 |
|---|---|
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.40 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.33 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.21 |
| Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits | 0.06 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 15:15 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.