World Suicide Prevention Day

Debate between Amanda Martin and Liz Twist

Tuesday 8th September 2026 Westminster Hall

[Liz Twist]

I look forward to meeting Alfie’s Squad later today; they are doing a great job on suicide prevention in my hon. Friend’s area. I will come on to the Premier League shortly.

I turn to the global statistics. The World Health Organisation calls suicide a “major public health challenge” and estimates that it claims the lives of more than 720,000 people every year. In the UK, the latest Office for National Statistics figures show that in 2024 there were 7,147 deaths registered where the cause was recorded as suicide. We know from the data that men account for three in four of those deaths, and that suicide is the biggest single cause of death for men under the age of 50.

[Amanda Martin (Portsmouth North) (Lab)]

I thank my hon. Friend for securing this important debate and for her dedication and hard work in this space. As the chair of the all-party parliamentary group for tradespeople, and having previously served on the all-party parliamentary group on male suicide and mental health, I am concerned that the construction industry faces a suicide risk 3.7 times higher than the national average. Will she join me in ensuring that the men’s health strategy moves from paper to practical action in workplaces, particularly in the construction industry? When we talk about workers coming home safely, that must mean both physically and mentally.

[Liz Twist]

Having done some work with the construction sector, I know exactly what my hon. Friend is talking about and how much attention must be paid to that issue.

Sadly, my region, the north-east, has the highest number of deaths by suicide. That is not a league table that we want to top. The latest figures put the north-east’s rate at 15.1 deaths per 100,000 people. For men who have been referred to secondary mental health services, it climbs to 157.8 per 100,000. That harsh reality demands urgent, targeted intervention.

Whenever we see such statistics in Parliament, we must immediately remind ourselves that there are real people behind the numbers. Each one of those individuals whose life was cut short leaves behind a devastating legacy of grief. The ripple effect of a single suicide spreads relentlessly through families, circles of friends and workplaces, and inflicts severe social and emotional consequences on entire communities.

--- Later in debate ---

[Liz Twist]

The right hon. Gentleman touches on another angle, namely the world of the internet, which provides such a challenge. The work of Ripple is important in preventing that harm, but there is so much more to do. I congratulate Ripple on its award.

Jami UK is a Jewish mental health organisation with which I have done a good deal of work; given the subject of our previous debate today, it seems particularly appropriate to mention it. It does fantastic work in London and beyond, and is a regular contributor to the APPG.

Individuals have also transformed personal tragedy into relentless campaigning. We have already heard about Philip Pirie, who has worked on an assessment of suicide risk and is now pushing for training on it to be mandatory for NHS staff. The 3 Dads Walking campaign has captured the attention of the entire country. After losing their daughters Sophie, Beth and Emily to suicide, they marched together across the UK to demand that suicide prevention be taught in schools.

[Amanda Martin]

It is amazing that my hon. Friend is highlighting the fact that, so very often, out of tragedy come amazing families campaigning. I want to raise the case of Chloe Holland and Skye Nicholls. Their families have been campaigning because their family members took their own life following coercive control. Does my hon. Friend agree that we must recognise the devastating link between suicide and coercive control, and ensure not only justice, but proper recognition and response?

Spinal Muscular Atrophy: Newborn Screening Test

Debate between Amanda Martin and Liz Twist

Monday 22nd June 2026 Westminster Hall

[Liz Twist]

I certainly do agree. The test should be made available to everyone to prevent people from living with the effects of SMA that could have been diagnosed and treated.

As I was saying, it is important that we now have testing, but we must expand it to the whole of the UK very quickly.

[Amanda Martin]

Does my hon. Friend agree that we need to ask the Government why babies born in Portsmouth matter less than babies born in other parts of the country? If we are one of the six areas that will not have testing or screening, the babies born in my city have less chance and are therefore less valued.

[Liz Twist]

I certainly agree with my hon. Friend’s point, which was also made by my hon. Friend the Member for Sunderland Central. All babies should have access to treatment. We know the clinical consensus is absolute.

In February 2025, leading clinicians published a letter in The Lancet contrasting the UK with countries that have screening programmes. In Belgium, babies born with SMA are ambulant. In the UK, babies with the exact same condition are still dying or remaining permanently reliant on ventilatory support and tube feeding. On the wider issue of newborn screening, a range of conditions could be the subject of testing, but we are behind the world on testing. Genetic Alliance UK and the APPG on rare, genetic and undiagnosed conditions are asking for a clear timeline for a systematic review of the NHS newborn screening programme from each of the four Governments across the UK to ensure that we do not miss the opportunity to give more children a better and a healthier life.

Returning to the issue of SMA screening, the UK National Screening Committee’s updated model from August 2025 confirms that introducing screening would prevent three early deaths and stop two babies from requiring permanent ventilation every single year. Crucially, it would also prevent about 30 babies from being confined to sitting and enable 37 babies annually to live largely normal lives.

There is a rigorous financial case for acting now. Treating SMA pre-symptomatically reduces the need for lifelong mechanical ventilation and round-the-clock care. Introducing newborn screening would result in lifetime savings to the public purse of over £62 million and 529 quality-adjusted life years for each annual cohort of newborns diagnosed.

I was relieved by the Government’s announcement last month that the in-service evaluation for SMA screening will finally begin in England this October. However, the Government confirmed on 16 June that the evaluation will cover only part of the country. Specifically, it will launch in only the seven newborn screening laboratories that already have the required equipment. There must be a way of getting around that problem so that all our babies can be tested and receive appropriate treatment if necessary. The Scottish Government began a national screening pilot for all newborns earlier this year, and Ireland announced the introduction of its own screening programme in April.

We cannot accept a health system in which a baby’s chance of typical neuromuscular development depends entirely on the hospital in which they happen to be born. Will the Minister confirm whether the evaluation will be extended immediately to cover all of England, as well as Wales and Northern Ireland, for the sake of those children? We have the treatment, economic case and diagnostic tools; we must stop denying babies the chance of a healthier future.