More than 50 cross-party MPs back amendment to decriminalise abortion
An amendment proposing to decriminalise abortion has been tabled in parliament, backed by a group of more than 50 cross-party MPs.
Put forward by the MP Tonia Antoniazzi, it is supported by several of her Labour colleagues including John McDonnell, Nadia Whittome, Jess Asato and Antonia Bance.
It has the backing of Liberal Democrats including Christine Jardine, Wera Hobhouse and Daisy Cooper, as well as the Green party's Siân Berry and Carla Denyer, Sorcha Eastwood from the Alliance party, and Liz Saville-Roberts and Llinos Medi from Plaid Cymru. Conservative MP Caroline Dineage also added her name to the amendment, as well as Claire Hanna from the SDLP.
Antoniazzi's amendment seeks to remove 'women from the criminal law related to abortion', and would mean 'no offence is committed by a woman acting in relation to her own pregnancy'.
It would mean women would no longer be criminalised under the Offences Against the Person Act 1861, the piece of Victorian legislation that most recent abortion cases have been prosecuted under.
Nor would they be criminalised under the Infant Life (Preservation) Act 1929, which carries the offence of 'child destruction'.
The amendment, to the government's crime and policing bill, follows on from one the Labour MP Diana Johnson, now a Home Office minister, had attempted to put forward to the last Conservative government's criminal justice bill, but which was never voted on as the legislation fell because a general election was called.
Antoniazzi said she had put forward the amendment because a change in the law 'is necessary'.
'We've seen a sharp rise in the number of women and girls facing criminal investigations following pregnancy loss and abortion,' she said. 'It's just wrong to put women in this situation, to put them into the criminal justice system, because this is not a criminal law issue, this is essentially a healthcare matter.'
She added: 'I find it unbelievable that in the last five years, around 100 women have been investigated by the police. It's just wrong. It's a waste of taxpayers' money, it's a waste of the judiciary's time, and it's not in the public interest. Therefore, the law has to change.'
The most recent woman to be prosecuted, Nicola Packer, 45, spent almost five years waiting for her case to come to court, before being unanimously cleared by a jury at Isleworth crown court last week. Antoniazzi attended court for a day of the trial with her colleague Tracy Gilbert MP to support Packer.
'I think it is, it is utterly, utterly disgraceful that she was put in this position, and shame on those people that brought this case forward,' Antoniazzi said.
The amendment, which if passed could become law as early as this summer, mirrors Johnson's previous amendment, Antoniazzi said, and 'doesn't change anything about the provision of abortion services'.
Rather than seeking to create a new framework, it retains the existing abortion law, she said: 'There's no change to time limits, and also how women access care, the need for two doctor signatures.'
A change to the law is being supported by professional bodies including the British Medical Association, the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, the Royal College of Midwives, the Royal College of Nursing, and the Royal College of General Practitioners.
'This is a simple amendment that looks after women, which is our principal aim here, to make sure that they are not criminalised for something that is not in the public interest,' Antoniazzi said.
'It's in their interest that we make sure that these women get the right support, the right help, and are not reported to the police for a pregnancy loss, a miscarriage, or a situation that they find themselves in that has become impossible,' she added.
'These women are vulnerable. They need our help, and they don't deserve to have their lives ruined.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Times
22 minutes ago
- Times
‘Unreliable' UK not told in advance about Israel's attack on Iran
The UK was not officially informed about Israel's attack on Iran before it happened and provided no support to the mission, it is understood, highlighting the deteriorating relationship between the two countries. Diplomats said it appeared Israel no longer considered the UK to be a 'reliable partner' after Sir Keir Starmer placed sanctions on two far-right Israeli ministers this week. Military planners inside the Ministry of Defence were braced for the strikes on Thursday night. However, the UK appeared to have been cut out of the loop on the operation, despite being involved in previous strikes. • US urges UK to reverse sanctions on far-right Israeli ministers An emergency Cobra meeting has been held to discuss the threat to British citizens in Iran and Israel. There is an ongoing review of whether the embassy should remain open in Tehran. The prime minister's spokesman confirmed 'the UK did not participate in Israel's strikes overnight', and MoD sources were quick to dispute any suggestion that the RAF had taken part in any military action to knock out Iranian drones. A senior government source said: 'They've clearly made the calculation [that] we are not a reliable partner.' David Lammy, the foreign secretary, had been due to travel to Washington DC on Friday, but the meeting was cancelled at the last minute. The United States said it was not involved in the attack, describing the Israeli action as unilateral, although that is likely to change if US personnel are targeted in the region. • Israel-Iran latest: further explosions heard at Fordow nuclear site In April last year, the UK deployed RAF Typhoons to help shoot down drones fired by Iran. The UK was also involved to a more limited extent last October during a ballistic missile attack by Tehran. On Monday, the government was concerned enough to hold a 'war game', led by Lammy, in which departments played out the possibility of a massive Israeli attack on Iran. Military personnel are understood to have taken part. A military source said the primary concern in London was for the safety of British citizens currently in Tehran, and British citizens in Israel. There are also fears that British shipping could be targeted by the Iran-backed Houthi rebel group in Yemen. The senior government source said the UK was having to 'walk a diplomatic tight rope' and the priority was the staff in Tehran. The UK government has hardened its stance on Israel and Starmer said earlier today: 'The reports of these strikes are concerning and we urge all parties to step back and reduce tensions urgently. Escalation serves no one in the region. Stability in the Middle East must be the priority and we are engaging partners to de-escalate. Now is the time for restraint, calm and a return to diplomacy.' Earlier in the week the far-right ministers Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich were banned from entering the UK and will have any assets in the UK frozen as part of the measures announced by Lammy. The sanctions were imposed over 'repeated incitements of violence against Palestinian communities' in the occupied West Bank. Starmer was expected to discuss the attacks with Netanyahu in a call on Friday. A Downing Street spokesman said the UK was prepared to take 'every diplomatic step' to prevent Iran developing nuclear weapons.
Sky News
24 minutes ago
- Sky News
Palpable anger as both sides of assisted dying debate gather in Parliament Square
Finger jabbing, the frenetic shaking of heads and the competitively loud chanting to drown out the opposition are all symptoms of rising tensions. The two sides of the assisted dying debate clashed on Parliament Square Garden as parliament worked through amendments on Kim Leadbeater's controversial bill. The sides have not shared the same space before, not intellectually, nor emotionally, nor physically. But on Friday, they stood uncomfortably close together, mostly squaring up to each other because neither side could afford to give an inch to the other. The pink-wearing supporters of the bill usually have the green lawns opposite Big Ben to themselves. The black-wearing opponents of the proposed legislation usually stand with their tombstone placards much further down towards Jewel Tower. But they decided to decamp to Parliament Square on the penultimate day ahead of the final vote next week. As the months have passed, the discourse has become increasingly bitter. There is a lot at stake for both sides, and the anger is palpable. Doctors have been publicly falling out with each other, each side accusing the other of spreading misinformation. Even some of the Royal Colleges have become embroiled in rows with sections of their membership calling out their leadership. And the emotion outside parliament was reflected inside the Commons when Liberal Democrat MP Caroline Voaden (South Devon), whose husband died of oesophageal cancer, warned MPs about the language being used. Assisted dying, she said, was not the same as "murder and killing". But those words, and stronger, were plastered across placards held by opponents of the bill outside parliament. Expect the language to become more incendiary, more accusatory in the weeks to come. In seven days, we will learn which side has won.
Times
26 minutes ago
- Times
Justice secretary to oppose abortion amendments in crime bill
The justice secretary will come out against stopping women being prosecuted for having an abortion before a landmark vote next week. Shabana Mahmood will write to constituents saying she has 'significant concerns' that a change in the law could give women an incentive to have unsafe abortions at home. Wes Streeting, the health secretary, is said to be weighing up whether to abstain or vote against amendments being tabled to the Crime and Policing Bill. Kemi Badenoch and Nigel Farage, the Conservative and Reform UK leaders, are expected to oppose the move. Two amendments have been tabled by Labour MPs and the Speaker will decide which to select for a vote, likely on Wednesday. Under Tonia Antoniazzi's amendment, already backed by 168 MPs, women would no longer be breaking the law if they terminated a pregnancy after 24 weeks or without approval from two doctors. New laws passed during the pandemic allow abortion pills to be taken at home up to ten weeks into a pregnancy, while later abortions must be carried out in a medical setting. Anyone who assists a woman in getting an abortion outside the law, including doctors, would still be liable for prosecution. The new rules would apply as soon as the change passes through parliament. An amendment by Stella Creasey, backed by 110 MPs, would make accessing an abortion a human right and make it harder for future governments to tighten restrictions through secondary legislation. The Times understands that Mahmood opposes both amendments, although she will be unable to vote against them as she is on ministerial business abroad next week. An ally said Mahmood had 'significant concerns' around the growth in the number of women using online services to order abortion pills without a physical consultation. 'She believes that, from a women's health and safety perspective, there's such little oversight,' the ally said. 'If you do take those pills later on, it can have a really terrible impact on you.' Senior government figures expect Antoniazzi's amendment to pass with a large majority. In a survey of more than 100 MPs, about 70 per cent agreed that women should not be liable for prison sentences if they have abortions outside the rules. Abortion providers have criticised Creasy's amendment and several MPs are considering dropping their public support for it in a bid to rally round a single cause. Six women in England have been charged in the past three years with illegally ending or attempting to end their pregnancies. The offence carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment. Carla Foster, 46, a mother of three from Staffordshire, was sentenced to 28 months after pleading guilty to administering drugs or using instruments to procure an abortion under a law from 1861. This was reduced on appeal to a 14-month suspended sentence. Last month, Nicola Packer, 45, was acquitted by a jury after being accused of taking abortion medicine at home in November 2020 during the Covid-19 lockdown, when she was about 26 weeks pregnant.
