Campaigners say women deserve better as they seek to decriminalise abortion
Organisations say more than 100 women are believed to have been investigated by the police in recent years under the current 164-year-old law, which sees abortion in England and Wales remain a criminal offence.
It is legal with an authorised provider up to 24 weeks, with very limited circumstances allowing one after this time, such as when the mother's life is at risk or the child would be born with a severe disability.
The British Pregnancy Advisory Service (Bpas) is backing a new amendment to the Crime and Policing Bill, brought by Labour MP Tonia Antoniazzi, stating that 'no offence is committed by a woman acting in relation to her own pregnancy'.
The group said the change would do away with the threat of investigation, arrest, prosecution or imprisonment currently faced by some women.
It insisted it would not change any law regarding the provision of abortion services within a healthcare setting, including the time limit, the grounds for abortion or the requirement for the approval of two doctors.
It said anyone, including a medical professional, who assisted a woman in obtaining an abortion outside the law would remain liable for prosecution.
Bpas said: 'For every woman who ends up in court, at least 10 others are subjected to prolonged police investigations which can prevent them from getting the mental health support they desperately need and which have resulted in existing children being separated from women whose cases never make it to court. Women deserve better.'
Ms Antoniazzi said the current law is 'unacceptable', adding: 'There is simply no world in which prosecuting a vulnerable woman who may have experienced a medical complication, miscarriage or stillbirth is the right course of action.'
She said her amendment, laid before Parliament on Tuesday, is 'tightly drawn – not changing anything about provision of abortion care, the time limit, the right to conscientious objection or any other aspects of abortion law'.
She added: 'I am confident that, when Parliament has the opportunity to vote on these proposals, my colleagues will agree that never again should a woman be prosecuted for ending her own pregnancy in England and Wales.'
The issue most recently came to the fore earlier this month with the case of a woman who took medication at home during a coronavirus lockdown in 2020.
Nicola Packer, 45, was cleared by a jury last week of 'unlawfully administering to herself a poison or other noxious thing' with the 'intent to procure a miscarriage'.
She had taken prescribed abortion medicine when she was around 26 weeks pregnant, beyond the legal limit of 10 weeks for taking such medication at home.
She told jurors she did not realise she had been pregnant for more than 10 weeks.
Following the trial, her friend said she had been 'persecuted' for a 'tragic accident', while the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (Rcog) claimed the trial showed 'just how outdated and harmful' current abortion law is as they backed calls for reform.
The case of Carla Foster, jailed in 2023 for illegally obtaining abortion tablets to end her pregnancy when she was between 32 and 34 weeks pregnant, eventually saw her sentence reduced by the Court of Appeal and suspended, with senior judges saying that sending women to prison for abortion-related offences is 'unlikely' to be a 'just outcome'.
The amendment on decriminalisation is said to have the backing of more than 50 cross-party MPs.
The latest attempt follows repeated calls to repeal sections of the 19th-century law – the 1861 Offences Against the Person Act – after abortion was decriminalised in Northern Ireland in 2019.
MPs had been due to debate similar amendments removing the threat of prosecution against women who act in relation to their own pregnancy at any stage, but these did not take place after Parliament was dissolved last summer for the general election.
It is expected a separate amendment could be published by a group led by fellow Labour MP Stella Creasy, to not only decriminalise abortion but to 'lock in' the right of someone to have one and protect those who help them.
Ms Creasy last week said the law must be changed so that 'the right to choose is a human right', ensuring no repeat of 'such awful cases and victimisation of vulnerable women again'.
The amendment would not cover Scotland, where a group is currently undertaking work to review the law as it stands there.
Last month, Scotland's women's health minister, Jenni Minto, said she was 'disappointed' that some still have to travel to England for late-term abortions, amid concerns that women in Scotland can only have a termination after 20 weeks in cases where there is either a foetal abnormality or the woman's life is at risk.
Louise McCudden, from provider MSI Reproductive Choices, said: 'No-one should face criminal prosecution for ending their own pregnancy. Our Victorian abortion laws are not only outdated, but inconsistent, with abortion now decriminalised in Northern Ireland but not in England, Wales, or Scotland.
'As one of the world's largest abortion providers, we're deeply concerned to see so many women face prosecution, even jail, in Britain.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Edinburgh Reporter
16 minutes ago
- Edinburgh Reporter
Edinburgh Council refuses to ban arms testing in city parks
An Edinburgh councillor has spoken out after a city committee voted not to ban arms firms from testing military equipment in city parks. In December 2024, arms manufacturer Leonardo was given permission to test communications equipment in the Braid Hills. Green councillor Ben Parker said he was 'disappointed' that councillors chose to not back his motion, which would have seen the practice banned. He continued: 'Today, Councillors had a chance to stand up for peace and instead chose inaction. 'Despite community objections and a clear moral imperative, the Labour, Liberal Democrat and Conservative parties have voted to continue to allow arms manufacturers to test their equipment in our beautiful, publicly owned, green spaces. 'The Council has previously taken a strong stance on opposing advertising and sponsorship from arms manufacturers, and it is completely hypocritical to then allow these same companies to use our beautiful public space to test their equipment. 'At a time when we are witnessing the ongoing genocide of the Palestinian people, we should not be supporting companies who profit from arms sales to the Israeli Government in any way.' Cllr Parker had originally put the motion forward for discussion at May's full council meeting, but an amendment by the Liberal Democrat group sent it to the Culture and Communities Committee for discussion. In a deputation to the committee, he urged councillors to take a stand on the issue, drawing comparisons to the city's Labour council taking a stand against apartheid during the 1986 Commonwealth Games held in the city. That year's games were protested widely, and boycotted by 26 nations, due to the UK Government's relationship with the then white-minority government in South Africa. Liberal Democrat councillor Fiona Bennett said: 'I have been to Iraq twice, once in 2018 with an NGO I'm very closely involved with and again in 2019 with the UN supporting victims of ISIS. 'I saw first-hand devastation throughout northern Iraq and in particular in Mosul – images that will never leave me, and images that will haunt me, for the rest of my life. 'The events unfolding around the world right now are harrowing. And I know people on the ground in Gaza right now, I can't bear what they're telling me. 'This is incredibly difficult, we're being forced to confront balancing our ethical values and responsibilities with the very real fragility of our national security. 'This is the most fragile and uncertain political, global landscape in my lifetime, and I really worry about the future our daughters have in front of them. 'So when we talk about banning testing, are we saying there should be no such testing anywhere in the UK? 'And if so, are we inadvertently undermining our own ability to defend ourselves at a time when global threats are growing and becoming even more complex?' Councillors narrowly supported an amended version of the motion put forward by the Liberal Democrat group, which did not pursue a ban. Instead, it referenced the city's draft parks management plan, which empowers council officers to ban any activity which will or could 'endanger' any person or property. By Joseph Sullivan Local Democracy Reporter Like this: Like Related
The National
16 minutes ago
- The National
Don't believe the spin – Davy Russell suffered no 'classism'
DAVY Russell came blinking into the sunlight, wiping soot from his sleeves on Friday morning. As he emerged from Lanarkshire's last remaining coal pit, the injuries of having suffered through 'classist' abuse during the Hamilton by-election campaign were nothing compared with the honour that awaited him above ground. He, Davy Russell, was to become a member of the Scottish Parliament. His heart quickened at the thought of Edinburgh's bright lights. Auld Reekie! Would the empty suits understand a bowls-playing, karaoke-crooning, shandy-sipping, authentic, real-deal guy such as he? I could go on. This is the story that Scottish Labour and some dewy-eyed commentators would have you believe. But Russell is no working-class hero. By all accounts, he is a pillar of the community in his new constituency of Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse. This does not make him Keir Hardie reincarnate, leading the charge against the condescension of the Holyrood elite. (Image: Craig Foy - SNS Group) Russell had a long career as a top bureaucrat in local government, becoming chums with the Glasgow Labour old boys during their time at the top in Scotland's biggest city. He used to run a business with former Rangers captain Barry Ferguson (above) and Asim Sarwar, brother of Anas. His style seems more wining and dining in the Ibrox directors' box than watching the dog racing before a few pints and a punch up down the local, or whatever similarly patronising image of 'working-class leisure pursuits' Anas Sarwar has in mind. Most pundits, myself included, had their arses handed to them on Friday morning after calling the Hamilton by-election badly wrong. READ MORE: How did Labour win the Hamilton by-election with an 'invisible man' candidate? But this was an SNP loss, with their vote halving, not a Labour victory, given they were down 3620 votes on their losing score in 2021. Russell's was a local campaign for local people, though the high drama of an unpredictable campaign – in Morgan McSweeney's back garden – set tongues wagging in Westminster, too. Scottish Secretary Ian Murray (below) and the Prime Minister both made election pitches on the floor of the House of Commons on Wednesday, each warning about the SNP's plans to downgrade the Wishaw neonatal unit. Labour's spin machine has it that it is this focus on local issues – apparently Russell spent the night before the vote addressing the Hamilton Accies Supporters Association – wot won it. If that's the case, then McSweeney's strategy which took Labour to victory on the tightest vote efficiency ever last year is very much still in play. It's less that Russell won people around to Labour; more that he managed to get most of the people who backed them last time around to do so again while SNP support collapsed. Scottish Labour are of course perfectly entitled to make the argument that voters rejected the SNP – they did – but not to try to silence their critics by accusing them of 'classism', as Sarwar did at the count in Hamilton. Criticism was levelled at Russell in the first instance because he ducked media scrutiny and because videos posted by Scottish Labour gave the impression he could barely say his own name without difficulty. It is not 'elitist' or 'classist' to point out that having some rhetorical skill may be an advantage to an aspiring politician. It is elitist to suggest that the reason someone comes across as thick is because they are from a working-class town in Scotland. And that's the argument that Hutchesons'-educated Sarwar went with. You can get the Worst of Westminster delivered straight to you email inbox every Friday at 6pm for FREE by clicking here.
The National
42 minutes ago
- The National
This result shows the time has arrived for make-or-break move for SNP
We didn't need Professor Curtice to highlight that SNP fortunes haven't improved since the General Election. It was readily apparent to anyone who followed this SNP leadership contesting Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse as a supposed party of 'independence' and yet not relying on it to garner support. At a time when national polling for independence is reckoned to hover around 54%, Swinney's SNP managed to garner just 12% support from Hamilton's electorate (only 29% of those who actually voted). Doesn't this prove beyond any doubt he and his party are getting it woefully wrong? At a time when the independence movement is straining at the leash for real campaigning political leadership, itching to get the campaign into full swing, hasn't the SNP's campaign chief, Jamie Hepburn, signalled indy being kicked down the road once again when in Laura Pollock's report (June 6) he states: 'Next year, we're going into a General Election for the Scottish Parliament ... the fundamental question will be who's forming the next government ... who's going to be the next first minister ... either John Swinney or Anas Sarwar.' READ MORE: Patrick Harvie: Increased UK defence spending only makes war more likely There we have it. This SNP's clear intention is to just play regional politics, presumably to secure their own positions, rather than fight the 2026 election as the de facto referendum the movement demands and the polls suggest the public desires. I suspect the new strategy SNP may be heading towards claiming that the de facto referendum should be at the next General Election and promising to make it so ... just as long as we elect them to Holyrood next year so they can 'deliver' it. Well, let's head that one off at the pass. If 2026 is ignored as the legitimate platform for Scots to determine their national status, or fail to force the referendum our democratic rights deserve, then who doubts the SNP will be soundly defeated and the independence movement will need to start from scratch to fight for independence without them; trust in the SNP decimated and Scotland's independence prospects truly parked for another generation – victory for the Unionists? If Keir Starmer, as seems likely, is about to scapegoat Rachel Reeves to secure his position, isn't it time for the SNP to scapegoat their current leader and his influencers in order to elect a leader in time for 2026 who has independence at heart, has the drive to deliver it and can persuade 54% and rising of Scots that they can do so? Hasn't the Hamilton election result shown the time has arrived for, if no serious independence leadership and drive for it, then no SNP? Jim Taylor Scotland THE loss of the Hamilton by-election to the risibly inept 'Scottish' Labour – a party so devoid of ideas it could barely muster a coherent manifesto – is not merely a setback. It is a catastrophe of the SNP's own making, a fiasco that reeks of complacency, strategic idiocy and the kind of centrist dithering that has come to define John Swinney's leadership. This was an entirely avoidable humiliation. Instead of seizing the moment – with independence support now at a formidable sum – Swinney, that master of inertia, chose to dither. His response? A pledge to wait until 75% of Scots beg for freedom before lifting a finger. One wonders if he imagines history's great emancipators –Washington, Bolívar, even the wretched Garibaldi – paused to consult focus groups before acting. When Starmer, that most unctuous of Westminster careerists, declared he would block any independence referendum, Swinney's silence was deafening. Not a word of defiance, not a hint of resistance to the colonial farce of Section 30. Instead, he opted to align with Labour – a party whose sole distinction from Reform is a marginally more polished veneer of hypocrisy. Both are Unionist to the core, united in their mission to siphon Scotland's wealth southward while offering nothing but condescension in return. The campaign itself was a masterclass in misdirection. Rather than rallying the independence movement with a bold vision, Swinney fixated on Reform – as if thwarting Nigel Farage's band of reactionary clowns was the defining struggle of Scottish nationalism. The result? A muddled, defensive mess that left voters uninspired and Labour undeservedly triumphant. Worse still, Swinney has perpetuated the worst excesses of the Sturgeon era: the cult of secrecy, the slavish deference to corporate interests (see: Flamingo Land's desecration of Loch Lomond) and the systematic sidelining of anyone with a spine. Sturgeon's legacy was to ensure that no competent successor could emerge – only loyalists and mediocrities, of which Swinney is the apotheosis. The truth is stark: the SNP have no plan for independence. No strategy beyond grovelling to Westminster for permission to hold a vote – a humiliation masquerading as diplomacy. It is a spectacle so pitiful it verges on self-parody. Swinney must go. Not with a whimper, but with the swift, decisive exit his failures demand. The independence movement deserves leaders who grasp that freedom is seized, not negotiated – and who possess the courage to act accordingly. Until then, the SNP's decline will continue, and Scotland's potential will remain shackled by the timid and the unimaginative. Alan Hinnrichs Dundee
