Skip to main content

Call to decriminalise abortion in UK

In an editorial in The BMJ, published today, editor in chief of BMJ Sexual & Reproductive Health, Sandy Goldbeck-Wood, on behalf of her editorial board colleagues, calls on British premier, Theresa May, to decriminalise abortion in the UK.   This follows the recent decisions to liberalise abortion laws in the Republic of Ireland and the Isle of Man.

Abortion law in UK

The UK 1967 Abortion Act was introduced to provide a legal defence against the criminal law passed in 1861,  but the Offences Against the Person Act remains on the statute book.

The women of Northern Ireland are the most vulnerable to this 150 years old, anachronistic piece of Victorian criminal law,  because under the law in the Province allows for no defence,  even in cases of rape or fatal fetal abnormalities. As a result, women who have an abortion in Northern Ireland still  face a maximum sentence of life imprisonment.

The UK government has argued that this is a matter for the devolved Northern Ireland Assembly, but currently these powers are being exercised from Westminster whilst the Assembly is suspended.

It is time that access to termination under the law to be made uniform for all United Kingdom citizens.

Four key arguments are presented.  First, whether or not it is legal, abortion is widespread.  Women are accessing medical abortion on-line despite the risks of prosecution.  Secondly, contrary to original concerns, decriminalisation does not increase abortion rates.  Thirdly,  criminalisation impedes safety.  Finally, they argue that the UK is out of step with the rest of Europe. 

Law obstructs best clinical practice

Perhaps the key argument the editorial presents  is that the law obstructs best clinical practice and undermines reflective decision-making across the whole of the UK and is no longer appropriate.

Instead they suggest: “Future UK law could support conscientious reflection in abortion care more effectively by guaranteeing women access to the resources they need to make the ethical and practical choices which are theirs to make and live with.”

Resources currently used to police choice and access could be reallocated to offering counselling services to women who are unsure about whether to terminate their pregnancy or who face a wider life crisis, and ensuring they get prompt access to contraception.

There widespread public and cross-party parliamentary support for decriminalisation in the UK,  including in Northern Ireland.

UK government held to ransom by reliance on DUP support

However, the editorial acknowledges that Theresa May’s slim parliamentary majority depends on the support of Democratic and Unionist Party (DUP) MPs, who have threatened “consequences” if Mrs May were to offer her party a free vote on the matter.

Nevertheless, the editorial calls on the prime minister to "seize the moment" to “champion evidence based reform of an outdated, ineffective and unpopular law, with the backing of health professionals and public opinion in Great Britain and Northern Ireland”.

Act of political courage 

As the authors say: “To do so, despite the threats against her, would be a memorable act of courage and leadership.”

Report by: Ray Noble

Subscribe to The Thin End


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Ian Duncan-Smith says he wants to make those on benefits 'better people'!

By any account, the government's austerity strategy is utilitarian. It justifies its approach by the presumed potential ends. It's objective is to cut the deficit, but it has also adopted another objective which is specifically targeted. It seeks to drive people off benefits and 'back to work'.  The two together are toxic to the poorest in society. Those least able to cope are the most affected by the cuts in benefits and the loss of services. It is the coupling of these two strategic aims that make their policies ethically questionable. For, by combining the two, slashing the value of benefits to make budget savings while also changing the benefits system, the highest burden falls on a specific group, those dependent on benefits. For the greater good of the majority, a minority group, those on benefits, are being sacrificed; sacrificed on the altar of austerity. And they are being sacrificed in part so that others may be spared. Utilitarian ethics considers the ba

Prioritising people in nursing care.

There has been in recent years concern that care in the NHS has not been sufficiently 'patient centred', or responsive to the needs of the patient on a case basis. It has been felt in care that it as been the patient who has had to adapt to the regime of care, rather than the other way around. Putting patients at the centre of care means being responsive to their needs and supporting them through the process of health care delivery.  Patients should not become identikit sausages in a production line. The nurses body, the Nursing and Midwifery Council has responded to this challenge with a revised code of practice reflection get changes in health and social care since the previous code was published in 2008. The Code describes the professional standards of practice and behaviour for nurses and midwives. Four themes describe what nurses and midwives are expected to do: prioritise people practise effectively preserve safety, and promote professionalism and trust. The

Mr Duncan-Smith offers a disingenuous and divisive comparison

Some time ago, actually it was a long time ago when I was in my early teens, someone close to me bought a table. It was an early flat pack variety. It came with a top and four legs. He followed the instructions to the letter screwing the legs into the top. But when he had completed it the table wobbled. One leg he explained was shorter than the other three; so he sawed a bit from each of the other legs. The table wobbled. One leg, he explained, was longer than the other three. So, he sawed a bit off. The table wobbled. He went on cutting the legs, but the table continued to wobble. Cut, cut, cut! By this time he had convinced himself there was no alternative to it.  He ended up with a very low table indeed, supported by four very stumpy legs and a bit of cardboard placed under one of them to stop it wobbling on the uneven floor.  Mr Duncan-Smith argues that we need a 1% cap on benefits to be 'fair to average earners'. Average  earners have seen their incomes rise by less tha