
Why it's never been more important to decriminalise abortion
When I scrambled out of my bathroom on all fours after an abortion in January 2022, I was paralysed by the pain.
Fast forward to five months later and again I found myself frozen with pain in the same flat in south London. However, this time round the anguish wasn't physical; instead, it was provoked by news the Supreme Court had overturned Roe v Wade – the landmark decision that legalised abortion nationwide in the US in 1973 – and millions of women had lost their legal right to have a pregnancy terminated. Life has changed immeasurably in America since this seismic decision.
Yet the shift has invariably had an impact across the pond, too; with anti-abortion ideologues growing further emboldened and better funded here in Britain. That's why it's never been more important to decriminalise abortion – now.
And now, Labour MPs Stella Creasy and Tonia Antoniazzi have both tabled amendments to the Crime and Policing Bill which would seek to decriminalise pregnancy terminations without 'changing anything about provision of abortion care'. It comes after the UK's largest abortion services estimated that police have investigated at least 100 women for having an abortion in the last five years.
Amendment NC1 has been backed by 177 cross-party MPs, as well as 50 leading medical bodies, women's rights groups and healthcare providers, including the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists and the British Medical Association. MPs will be voting on it today.
These calls are by no means new. Rather, abortion providers, charities, medical bodies, activists and MPs have spent years calling for abortion law to be disentangled from criminal law and overseen in the same way that other medical practices are. But their demands have often fallen on deaf ears for a whole range of reasons.
One is the fact that many Britons are oblivious that abortion care remains firmly ensconced in criminal law.
For those who need a refresher on how abortion law works here: pregnancy terminations can be legally carried out within the first 24 weeks of pregnancy in England, Scotland and Wales – but only if the abortion is approved by two doctors, with the health professionals agreeing that continuing with the pregnancy would be riskier for the physical or mental health of the woman than having an abortion.
If a medical professional delivers an abortion outside of the terms of the 1967 act, they are at risk of being prosecuted.
Legislation passed in 1861 means any woman who ends a pregnancy without getting legal permission from two doctors can technically face up to life imprisonment – fortunately, this does not currently happen in reality. Abortions after the 24-week mark can only be legally performed in very restricted situations, such as if the mother's life is in danger, or the child will have a severe disability.
So, why are so many people so keen to reform abortion law? Well, for starters, it is hardly surprising there is enthusiasm to change legislation which dates back to a time when young boys risked their lives as chimney sweeps – and public executions were legal.
Additionally, the desire for reform arises from the recognition that those who access abortions outside regulated provision or past the cut-off point are (for the most part) highly vulnerable. As such, they need support and care, not the psychological pressure and impending doom of a police investigation hanging over them; or worse still, being locked up in a prison system riddled with human rights abuses.
'Our lawmakers have a choice to make,' Sarah Salkeld, deputy medical director at leading abortion provider, MSI Reproductive Choices, tells The Independent.
'Do they want to be part of the 'green wave', moving gender equality forward? Or do they want to see prosecutions of vulnerable women on their watch? At a time when reproductive rights are facing rollbacks in many countries, and with the anti-rights movement feeling emboldened by the reversal of Roe v Wade in the United States, it could not be more important that here in the UK, elected lawmakers stand up for women and support everyone to get the medical care they need safely, confidentially and free from the threat of invasive investigation and prosecution.'
She points out that women who have illegal abortions sometimes have significant mental health problems, or may be domestic abuse victims, or teenagers whose parents are opposed to abortions. 'I don't see how it would be in anyone's interest to prosecute somebody who has gone to such desperate measures,' Ms Salkeld says. 'It just doesn't feel right and it doesn't support someone who is clearly in a very difficult position and we are talking very small numbers of people here who would potentially be in that position.'
For this reason and more, it is high time we decriminalise abortion. With the far right growing around the world and its war on reproductive rights ramping up, reform feels especially urgent. MPs were set to debate similar amendments around this time last year but ongoing campaigning efforts were abruptly cut short when a snap election was called and parliament was dissolved to make way for this.
When I think back to my own nightmare experience of having an abortion – something I wrote about in a first-person story for The Independent – I am reminded of the fear I felt contending with overwhelmed abortion providers. In the end, overstretched services meant I was left near the 10-week cut-off point for a medical abortion, which involves taking pills.
If I had gone past this deadline, I would have been forced to have a surgical abortion. While all abortions are safe, surgical ones are riskier and more of an ordeal as they involve going to hospital for a procedure.
For some, an abortion will be the most traumatic experience of their lives. For others, it is not. But the important thing to bear in mind is the fact your experience of a termination is not just dictated by your personal feelings or physical health.
On the contrary, external factors can transform a straightforward procedure you quickly recover from into a living nightmare that needlessly drags on and on. Sadly, it is the latter that women so often encounter when they are pulled into the criminal justice system after having an abortion.
We finally have the chance to change that – and improve women's lives.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Daily Mail
20 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
GRAHAM GRANT: 'See me after class'? No, Jenny Gilruth should be expelled from the cabinet for her failures over the scourge of school bullies
There was a shudder of fear and apprehension last week when Jenny Gilruth unveiled her new discipline crackdown. But the Education Secretary's plan for taming classroom thugs is unlikely to have inspired dread among the troublemakers.


The Independent
34 minutes ago
- The Independent
Series of public inquiries on Troubles incidents ‘not the way forward'
The legacy of Northern Ireland's past is not going to be dealt with by a series of public inquiries, Secretary of State Hilary Benn has said. He came under questioning over the Government's handling of legacy cases during a meeting of the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee on Monday. Mr Benn insisted that a reformed Independent Commission for Reconciliation and Information Recovery (ICRIR) will be able to deal with the cases. The body led by Sir Declan Morgan, a former lord chief justice for Northern Ireland, was set up by the former government's Legacy Act after scores of legacy inquests and other court cases relating to the Troubles were halted. The Kingsmill massacre and the Guildford pub bombings are among cases it is currently looking at. Mr Benn told MPs they are working to change disclosure arrangements and to make it compliant with Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights. 'In the end, we're not going to deal with legacy with a whole series of public inquiries,' he said. 'We're doing all this work to try and create a body which is capable of delivering justice for all, information for all, answers for all. 'That is what I am trying to do at the moment because of the incompatibilities identified.' He was asked about his decision not to call a public inquiry into the circumstances around the murder of GAA official Sean Brown in 1997. In May the UK Government confirmed it will seek a Supreme Court appeal over a court ruling that ordered it to hold a public inquiry into Mr Brown's murder. The 61-year-old then-chairman of Wolfe Tones GAA Club in the Co Londonderry town of Bellaghy was ambushed, kidnapped and murdered by loyalist paramilitaries as he locked the gates of the club in May 1997. No-one has ever been convicted of his killing. Preliminary inquest proceedings last year heard that in excess of 25 people had been linked by intelligence to the murder, including several state agents. It was also alleged in court that surveillance of a suspect in the murder was temporarily stopped on the evening of the killing, only to resume again the following morning. Asked about Mr Brown's case, Mr Benn told MPs: 'It's an awful, awful case. 'The murder of Sean Brown was shocking, deeply violent, and this has caused immense suffering to the family, to his widow Bridie and to the wider community, including the GAA family, because of the role that he undertook. 'But I came to the conclusion that the commission reformed would be capable of looking into it, and there's an issue of principle here in respect to the court ruling. 'Up until this moment, the courts accepted that it is for governments to decide whether public inquiries are ordered, not for the courts. 'What the courts have tended to say is, this is the test that has to be met, the way in which the government chooses to meet that test is a matter for governments to decide. 'There is a margin of appreciation that is made available. 'In this particular case, the court has decided to order a public inquiry. 'We're seeking leave to appeal to the Supreme Court because of that fundamental principle, which is, courts do not order public inquiries, governments do, and that is very important because of the nature of the mandatory order I am not able to do anything else other than order a public inquiry, which I made it clear that the Government is not going to do, because I believe there's another means of dealing with this case.' Mr Benn said there are five other cases that are in the same position. 'People say the Sean Brown case is unique. All murders are unique and uniquely painful for the family, but it is not a unique case,' he said. 'This is not a unique case, and I would also say we are not going to deal with legacy by having a whole series of public inquiries. 'That is not a way forward. That is why we have to make the reform of the commission to win public confidence. 'To make it ECHR compliant is so important because then you have a mechanism that you can use to deal with all of them and all of us, the committee, the whole team, everybody needs to be concerned about justice for everyone.' He added: 'It is open to the Brown family to go to the commission today, the commission will start work on investigating.'


Sky News
37 minutes ago
- Sky News
UK could send further capabilities to Middle East, minister says
The UK could send further capabilities to the Middle East if necessary, a minister has suggested after Iran launched a missile attack on a US military base in Qatar. Luke Pollard told the Commons that additional RAF Typhoon jets announced by Sir Keir Starmer last week have arrived in the region to "deter threats and reassure our partners". He added: "I want to be clear, we will not rule out sending further capabilities if they are required, and we will take all steps necessary to protect our people and our assets." Mr Pollard, the armed forces minister, said it is a 'fast-changing' situation which Downing Street is monitoring closely. He said the UK government "utterly condemns any escalation" and a diplomatic solution is needed. "There is no route for Iranian military retaliation that brings this crisis to an end. The only offramp for Iran is to get serious and to return to diplomacy." Iran's attack comes after America's strikes on Tehran's nuclear facilities over the weekend. Qatar said its air defences intercepted the attack, which was at the US Al Udeid military base in Doha, and there are no reports of casualties. The strikes came shortly after Qatar announced it was closing its airspace following a US security alert, while the UK Foreign Office had urged British nationals to "shelter in place". Evacuations from Israel begin Earlier, Foreign Secretary David Lammy had updated MPs on the escalating conflict, amid efforts to evacuate British nationals from Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories. Israel began strikes against Iran earlier this month, claiming Tehran was on the verge of developing nuclear weapons, and has struck nuclear sites, military bases and civilian areas. Iran insists its nuclear programme is only for peaceful purposes. It has retaliated with missile and drone strikes on Israel. Mr Lammy said that an RAF A400 took 63 UK nationals and dependants to Cyprus on Monday, from where they will be taken to the UK. He said more flights will follow, with those with the greatest need to be prioritised. He also confirmed that one British national in Israel had been injured during Iranian missile attacks and had been offered consular support. The UK had not begun evacuating civilians up to this point, saying it had to wait for airspace to open up before planes could be sent. Mr Lammy said it was more difficult to support British nationals in Iran as airspace is closed and there is a "near total internet shutdown". He urged Iran not to retaliate against the US, telling MPs: "My message for Tehran was clear, take the off ramp, dial this thing down, and negotiate with the United States seriously and immediately. "The alternative is an even more destructive and far-reaching conflict, which could have unpredictable consequences." 1:53 Mr Lammy also faced questions on the legality of the US strikes, but said it "must rightly be a matter for the US government in relation to their action". "This was not our action. We have been clear that we were not involved," he said. SNP Westminster leader Stephen Flynn accused the foreign secretary of "taking the public for fools" by refusing to answer the question directly, while shadow foreign secretary Dame Priti Patel accused the government of hiding behind "vague language". She added: "The British public deserve to know if their government supports degrading the threat of Iran to us and our allies, or whether it is all too happy to sit on the moral fence."