Lord Shinkwin was appointed a Commissioner by the Government Equalities Office earlier this year, and has since then been lobbying in public for the EHRC to take up the Bill. Voice for Choice is also concerned that this contravenes the codes of conduct that come with his role.

The Bill

If the Abortion (Disability Equality) Bill were to become law, then the Abortion Act 1967 would be amended to stipulate that women would no longer have the option to end a pregnancy after 24 weeks when faced with a serious antenatal diagnosis. This includes cases where there is no realistic possibility of a pregnancy resulting in a baby able to survive after birth.

On multiple occasions, UN bodies have ruled that denying women abortion in cases of fatal foetal abnormality violates their human rights. The United Nations Human Rights Committee (UNHRC) has twice ruled that the denial of abortions in the Republic of Ireland in the case of a fatal foetal abnormality violated women’s rights to be free from cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, and to privacy and equality.

As foetal anomalies are often only diagnosed at 18 to 21 weeks, amending current abortion law would have catastrophic implications for women who receive an antenatal diagnosis. Removing the ability to have such abortions post-24 weeks would force women to make a rapid decision at an incredibly difficult time and severely limit opportunities to engage with specialist healthcare professionals and third sector organisations. Women and their partners would be denied the support they deserve.

Jane Fisher, Director of Antenatal Results and Choices (the only national charity helping parents and healthcare professionals through antenatal screening and its consequences) said: “We speak regularly to expectant parents on our helpline who have been given devastating news from their 20 week scan and require further tests to gain as much information as possible on the implications for their baby. Without this ground for abortion, post-24 weeks, such parents would be put under intolerable pressure. Some would have to make a hurried decision to terminate at 23 weeks, foregoing further investigations, if they do not wish to carry a baby with a fatal or severely debilitating condition to term”.

Jayne Spink PhD, Chief Executive of Genetic Alliance UK said: “There are a significant number of genetic conditions that result in still-birth or severe neonatal illness that prove lethal very early on in life. The quality of life of a child born with such severe health problems is extremely poor and the impact upon their parents and families can be enormous. What is usually a happy event, the birth of a child, is turned into a crisis. Such an experience can be so devastating that couples may choose not to try for another child. Reproductive choice remains an incredibly important option for women at risk of having an affected child. The Bill seeks to limit choice and in doing so will bring about avoidable harm.”

Complaint

Lord Shinkwin has repeatedly spoken out about his Bill, including during purdah, and has attacked the EHRC for not readily supporting his Bill both in the media and in Parliament. Voice for Choice believes that his behaviour has broken a number of codes of conduct that govern Commissioners’ behaviour, including that ‘Individual Commissioners… commenting on matters in their Commission capacity or on a topic within the Commission’s remit… will normally be expected to support [our established lines]. These protocols apply even where the request is made in a non-Commission capacity, as any comments made may nevertheless be linked back to the Commission. Commissioners… should also be clear to stakeholders and the media when they are speaking in a non-Commission capacity, and take care their actions do not compromise or conflict with the role as a member of the Board or Committee.’

Further quotes from Voice for Choice members:  

A Humanists UK spokesperson commented: “Lord Shinkwin’s Bill, if passed into law, would lead to some of those who need an abortion the most from being unable to access it. It is simply horrific that women would be forced to carry to term foetuses that are not viable, and for this reason we very much expect that the Equality and Human Rights Commission will not support the Bill, but instead put a stop to his behaviour which is utterly inappropriate for a sitting Commissioner.”

A spokesperson from Doctors for a Woman’s Choice on Abortion said: “If Lord Shinkwin’s Bill became law it would inevitably force some women carrying a foetus with a fatal or severely debilitating abnormality to continue with their pregnancy and give birth. This would be unspeakably cruel, with serious consequences for their mental health as well as the mental health of their partners and any existing children. There are also a number of foetal conditions such as severe hydrops where continuing the pregnancy seriously compromises women’s health and can even endanger their lives.

As doctors we are committed to doing the best for our patients. This Bill would seriously undermine our ability to fulfil this legal, professional and moral duty and at a time when women desperately need our help and support.

We are also deeply concerned about Lord Shinkwin’s role and Equality and Human Rights Commissioner, and believe that bringing this Bill calls into question his suitability for this important position.”

For more information:

Please contact the Voice for Choice co-Chair Laura Russell on laurar@fpa.org.uk.

This year marks the 50th anniversary since the introduction of the Abortion Act. This landmark piece of legislation granted women across Great Britain the right to reproductive choice, through access to legal, safe, state-funded abortion care. This Act was never extended to Northern Ireland, leaving women who face an unplanned or crisis pregnancy to suffer daily discrimination and inequality under the Victorian legislation that still governs their right to bodily autonomy.

Women in Northern Ireland seeking abortion are forced to travel away from their homes, pay for a private procedure at a cost that can reach thousands of pounds or buy medical abortion pills online, which is illegal and leaves them vulnerable to prosecution. This has happened recently. One 21-year-old woman was handed a suspended sentence for procuring her own abortion, while a man and woman have accepted a police caution for purchasing pills. While talks continue between the Conservatives and the DUP, more women in Northern Ireland are awaiting trial.

Prosecuting women for accessing this medication is further punishing individuals who already struggle to access services, and increases the stigma and fear for women in Northern Ireland. UK courts and the United Nations have ruled that the law is a clear abuse of human rights, which the UK Government in Westminster has a responsibility to uphold.

A Conservative government must protect the right to abortion in Great Britain and legislate for abortion law reform in Northern Ireland. It is clear that any potential deal with the DUP must not block progress on abortion rights.

We urge the Government to publicly commit to protecting women’s fundamental human rights to dignity, respect and freedom from reproductive coercion.

Life’s website clearly states that their vision is to make abortion ‘a thing of the past.’ It is therefore clear that the counselling service they provide – which is now in receipt of Government funding – is not non-directive. Numerous reports have highlighted misinformation promoted by Life, including the false claim that abortion is linked to breast cancer, as well as the bias and poor quality of their counselling and information services.

Access to abortion is a human right, and abortion itself a safe and legal procedure. Organisations that disseminate misinformation and provide unethical services in order to further their own anti-abortion agenda should not receive government funding ahead of charities providing high quality, essential services for women and girls.

You can call on the government to explain and review their decision on the BPAS website 

For more information, see the following reports:

• Education for Choice‘s 2014 report highlighting misinformation and poor practice in independent pregnancy counselling centres (including those run by Life)
• Education for Choice and the British Humanist Association‘s 2012 reports on anti-choice educational resources (including those produced by Life)

The Mail on Sunday chose to focus only on Professor Savage’s comments on ‘sex-selective’ abortion rather than report the majority of the discussion, in order to further their own agenda.

We stand by Professor Savage’s comments that there is no evidence for ‘sex-selective’ abortion taking place in the UK. Like Professor Savage, we believe that information during pregnancy should not be withheld from prospective parents and hold concerns about proposed bans on ‘sex selective’ abortions (as outlined in this letter).

Voice for Choice stands against the sexist devaluation of women in society while recognising that gender equality cannot be achieved by placing additional restrictions on abortion services. Instead, we believe in protecting women from coercion by making sure that consent procedures are robust and in safeguarding for vulnerable women in cases where it’s needed.

For Professor Savage’s verbatim comments to the Mail on Sunday please see below. These comments were transcribed and arranged under the subheadings below by the Mail on Sunday journalist Stephen Adams and emailed to Professor Savage. We have made a few corrections to the spelling of names and places.

Verbatim comments from Professor Wendy Savage (16th March 2017)

On why abortion needs to be decriminalised.

The current law does not give women the right to choose what happens to their own bodies. It requires them to get the consent of two doctors, which is understandable in the context of 1967, but 50 years on, things have moved on.

…

The woman needs have the facts, which need to be discussed with her. You need to find out that she’s not under any pressure [to abort] that she is making her own decision and she is not being pushed into it by somebody else. But women are adult human beings – they can make their own minds up. And it’s the woman who tends to look after the child, for the rest of her life.

On what you would like to happen legally

I would like us to do what the Canadians did, which was to remove abortion from criminal statutes. You can control it [abortion] by regulation, like other medical operations and procedures are already done.

On the motion ‘to set up a working party’ [etc] at last year’s BMA ARM

I did it on behalf of the Islington division of the BMA, where I am the chair. It was the third time we had put in a motion like that, in three years.

…

It was the members who were trying to get it on to the agenda, and the members who voted for it. It certainly wasn’t the BMA hierarchy

On concerns that you, with a very clear agenda to decriminalise abortion, should also be on the BMA’s MEC and potentially having a strong influence on the Discussion Paper

The discussion paper was drawn up by the staff of the Medical Ethics Committee, and then it is circulated to us all and then we discuss it at a meeting and people can suggest amendments and these are agreed, or not agreed.

…

My position [on abortion] is quite well known; and we have other members on the committee who are [of other opinions].

…

[We have] ethicists and religious people. It’s not a committee which you can actually sway one way or the other….It’s not like I’d have a casting vote or anything. It’s very much a consensus amongst the members, and people’s views vary quite widely.

On accusations the BMA is on a ‘crusade’ to decriminalise abortion

It’s not a crusade, it’s coming from the grassroots. The fact that it took us three years before we managed to get it on the agenda, and we only got it on the agenda because we got it as a chosen motion – certainly doesn’t suggest that the BMA is having a crusade.

…

The BMA is a reasonably democratic organisation. And the way policy is made, you bring motions to the ARM. The chair is scrupulous in taking ‘for’ and ‘against’ viewpoints, and then we vote on it. There are people in the BMA who are violently opposed to abortion, just as there are people like myself who feel that women should have a choice.

On whether doctors are in favour of decriminalising abortion or not

It’s not something that’s been discussed with doctors very much

…

We [you and Colin Francome at Middlesex University] did a survey of gynaecologists in 2015 and asked them if they thought abortion should be decriminalised. And there was a slim majority that said yes. About a quarter didn’t know and there were a few who didn’t realise that it was a criminal offence.

On the Daily Telegraph’s 2012 ‘sting’ and claims of sex-selective abortion in the UK

I think that to entrap the doctors by posing as a [pregnant] woman and giving a false story, is not a good way to go.

…

The thing is, the question of women requesting abortions on the grounds of foetal sex, is a complete red herring. It just isn’t something that happens in practice.

…

In my experience, women asking for abortion on the grounds of foetal sex, are extremely rare.

….

I only ever had one woman ask for an abortion, on the grounds of foetal sex, and that was a woman who didn’t want a boy.

…

I don’t think it’s an issue. Women don’t come asking for it.

…

We did ask the question [if UK gynaecologists had been asked to perform sex-selective abortions] when Colin and I did this survey in 2015, and we asked gynaecologists whether they had had requests for sex selection. And 96% of them said ‘Never’. That was to a random sample of practising gynaecologists.

…

It isn’t a problem, people requesting terminations on the grounds of foetal sex. In this country it’s not a problem.

On whether it is still your view that “We are also opposed to gender discrimination, but sex selective abortion is not gender discrimination. Gender discrimination applies only to living people.”  [Contents of the Voice for Choice letter in Open Democracy you signed in 2012]

Yes

…

[You continued] I just don’t think it’s a problem in practice in this country. It is a problem in India but the steps they have taken to try to deal with that haven’t dealt with it. And the way to get rid of gender discrimination is to improve education and the lot of women in society.

On the fact that both WHO and the UN regard sex-selective abortion (notable of female foetuses) as a major issue worldwide.

It is a problem in other parts of the world, because it’s affecting the sex ratio. But it’s not a problem here and the Department of Health has checked our statistics and they have not found that there’s a sex imbalance.

…

Women are doing it [requesting sex-selective abortion in other countries] because they are being forced into it by sexist assumptions.

On whether women should as a matter of principle be able to have a termination solely on the grounds of the sex of the foetus, putting aside the question of whether or not it happens in the UK.

I do think that it is a woman’s right to decide whether or not to carry on with a pregnancy. It’s her body. She is the one taking the risks. The foetus of course is a potential human life at that stage, it is not an actual human life…. My feeling is that the rights of the foetus increase as the pregnancy continues. So the nearer it is to viability, the more its rights are.

On whether the guidance brought in by the Department of Health on May 2014 on sex-selective abortion [‘Abortion on the ground of gender alone is illegal.’] was in your view legally sound and the right thing to do.

The law is clear. The law doesn’t say ‘You can have abortion on the grounds of X or Y’ – rape or whatever. It says, ‘You can have an abortion if, two doctors in good faith, believe that etc etc.’ [i.e it would jeopardise the physical or mental health of the woman to continue with the pregnancy]. It doesn’t mention the grounds. The fact the Chief Medical Officer sent out something that said otherwise, I disagreed with that…The way the law is framed is not about grounds, in that way. What you have got to talk about is the effect upon the woman. Is it a risk to her physical or mental health, if the pregnancy continues?

…

I think it [the DH guidance] was a response to a political thing. I don’t think it was correct, legally…. If a woman does not want to have a foetus who is one sex or the other, forcing her to do that is not going to be good for the eventual child, and it’s not going to be good for her mental health…. I think that is you are looking out for the woman’s health, yes [she should be allowed to terminate on grounds of foetus gender]. [But] I just don’t think it’s an issue [in the UK]. In practice, it isn’t an issue.

…

Because of this sort of anxiety [about sex-selective abortions] some places won’t tell the woman the sex of foetus, which I think is outrageous. It’s her body and her foetus, so she should have that information. I think it’s up to the doctor to talk to the woman and if the doctor thinks the woman is being put under pressure to have a termination that she doesn’t want, then it’s not her requesting it and he or she won’t do it.

On the prevalence of late abortion in the UK and whether decriminalising abortion would change that

Women don’t request terminations late on in pregnancy, unless they are mentally ill or whatever.

..

On the whole women don’t present for abortions after 24 weeks unless a foetal abnormality has been detected. It’s quite rare for women to do that [request late abortion] and I don’t think that changing the law [to decriminalise abortion] would make any difference to that.

…

The only study that has been done in this country [on late abortion] is one that I did in Tower Hamlets in 1983. [This identified 10 or 11 late abortions across the whole of Tower Hamlets’ population.]… In my career as an obstetrician and gynaecologist, I have only had a couple of cases over 24 weeks, over 35 years.  I’ve had about one every 10 years…. So it’s not something that women tend to do.

…

This is another of these myths propagated by the anti-abortion lobby, like women wanting sex selection.

…

Fortunately, women don’t come asking for abortions at 22 or 23 weeks. Because it’s hard for the doctor, weighing up the rights of the foetus versus the rights of the mother. It’s not an easy thing, doing a late termination. It’s difficult.

…

Doctors do not do this [late termination] willingly. They do it because they feel it is the best solution for the woman, to a problem that everybody wishes has never happened, but it has happened.

…

Scotland has a different legal situation from us. Before the 67 act there were not lots of very late terminations in Scotland, and it would have been possible for women to do if they had wanted to do it. But they don’t want to do it, basically. The woman herself, when she starts feeling the baby move, doesn’t. It’s only if she’s really, really troubled that she will do something [request / attempt late abortion].

On whether the moral rights of the foetus to life can and should ever override the rights of the woman to choose, e.g. post 24 weeks

I feel that it’s not something that in practice you have to make your mind up about. Because women don’t request terminations late on in pregnancy, unless they are mentally ill or whatever. When you think about the fact that 50% of fertilised eggs are lost before the woman would have missed her period – so you’ve lost half those potential human beings. And you’ve got another 10% or so lost in the next 13 weeks. So if you are losing over half of them before 13 weeks, it’s quite hard to say ‘When does this become an entity with moral rights?’ So I don’t really like to ascribe moral rights to a foetus, I wait until it’s a baby.

…

I think you have got to concentrate on the woman, that’s what my position is. She is the one who is here, and she has got a whole network of relationships, and she is the one usually who ends up looking after the baby when it’s born.

On whether women should be able to legally obtain abortion pills directly, without seeing a health professional, for example via the internet

Women can obtain pills from the internet and do it themselves, and are doing that.

…

I think it’s always helpful for a woman to discuss whether she should continue with a pregnancy with a professional, who doesn’t have to be a doctor, it could be a nurse.

I don’t think it should be mandatory [that they must see a doctor / nurse before getting abortion pills]; I think it is advisable but I don’t think it should be mandatory. Because I think the majority of women are adults who can make their own decisions.

On why you became involved in the provision of abortion in the first place

I became aware of the strength of feeling that women had, when my own housemaid [became pregnant and] I told to go home and tell her parents. She didn’t tell her parents, went to a native doctor, came back to Enugu, started vomiting blood and was dead within half an hour. She was 17 years old. It was shocking.

..

We were taught abortion was wrong and I hadn’t questioned that. But when I saw these young women coming in having taken this native medicine and just dying of organ failure, it really did affect me.

On the effect of the Abortion Act 1967

Abortion had been the leading cause of maternal mortality [pregnant to 6 weeks post-birth] from the mid 50s until after the Act was brought in. Then it declined. In the last decade we have only had one death….I would argue that the 67 Act was one of the most important public health measures of the last century. So the battle about maternal mortality has been won. But this is about the human rights aspect. Women are autonomous beings; they should have control over their own lives.

On whether you think the BMA will adopt a policy of supporting decriminalising abortion, and whether you think the law will change.

I think it’s a long term thing….If the ARM agreed to support the BMA having a policy to support decriminalisation of abortion I would be very pleased, but I don’t expect that [the law change] to happen overnight.

[If the BMA was to agree such a policy] Parliament does take notice of the people who deal with a particular issue, I think it would be very positive, but I’m not holding my breath.

On the ‘pro-life’ lobby

Quite a lot of high profile abortionists like Ronald Reagan for example, weren’t at all anti-war. So it’s a misnomer to say that they are pro-life. Often they are against using contraception, they are against assisted conception, and you could say that assisted conception is a pro-life issue.

About

Abortion Support Network (ASN) is a charity that provides financial assistance, accommodation and confidential, non-judgemental information to women forced to travel from Ireland and Northern Ireland and pay privately for abortions in England. The cost of this ranges from £400 to £2000 depending on circumstance and stage of pregnancy.

ASN was founded with the understanding that making abortion against the law doesn’t stop abortion but only stops safe abortion. Or as we say as often as we can to anyone who will listen, making abortion against the law means that when faced with an unwanted pregnancy, women with money have options and women without money have babies, or do dangerous and desperate things.

ASN is not a campaigning or lobbying organisation. While other organisations campaign for much needed law reform, our volunteers work hard to provide immediate, practical support to women who are unable to access safe and legal abortion in their own countries. We believe that the laws in these countries should change, so that women don’t have to seek help from our organisation. In the meantime, we will do as much as we can to help as many women as possible.

To find out more about ASN and our work, please visit: www.asn.org.uk.

Introduction and summary

Abortion Support Network welcomes the launch of the Women and Equalities Select Committee enquiry into the Government’s plans for achieving the UN Sustainable Development Goal 5 (SDG5).  As the one organisation helping women and pregnant people without access to NHS abortions, our submission will focus on the aim to ‘ensure universal access to sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights’, with particular reference to Northern Ireland’s highly restrictive abortion legislation.

Access to abortion in Northern Ireland is covered by the Offences Against the Person Act 1861, as the 1967 Abortion Act does not apply. This means that abortion is only available in exceptional circumstances (if the mental or physical health of the woman is at serious or grave risk of permanent or long term harm). Virtually no abortions are carried out on the NHS in Northern Ireland. This leaves women needing abortions with three options: to continue an unwanted pregnancy, to face imprisonment by accessing safe but illegal early medical abortion pills from the internet, or to raise the £400 to £2000 it costs to travel to England and pay privately for an abortion.  According to the Department of Health, 833 women gave Noethern Irish addresses at UK clinics, but this number does not count the women who stayed with a friend or family member, who gave the address of a BandB or hotel, or who gave a false address. It also doesn’t count the hundreds if not thousands of women accessing safe but illegal early medical abortion pills via www.womenhelp.org and www.womenonweb.org.

We are aware that campaigning and other organisations will be sending in submissions but did want to give you our perspective. We are not academics or campaigners but we are experts on the real human cost of making abortion against the law. Most women in Northern Ireland when faced with an unwanted or non-viable pregnancy, will have a support network, a job, a credit card, travel documents. These are not the people Abortion Support Network hears from. We are contacted by people who are forced by a combination of draconian abortion laws and poverty to call a group of strangers in England, involve them in what should be their personal and private abortion decision, and ask for money.

The human cost of Northern Ireland’s Abortion policy

Abortion Support Network started in 2009 because we believe that “I can’t afford an abortion” shouldn’t be the only reason someone has a child. We believe individual women (or people, as we know a handful of our clients have been trans men) are best placed to decide whether they are ready and able to parent now or ever. We know for a fact that making abortion illegal doesn’t stop it being carried out; it only stops safe abortion. It means that when faced with an unwanted or non-viable pregnancy, those with the £400-£2000 it costs to travel to England have options, and those who do not have babies. Or, in our experience, they may risk prison by taking safe but illegal early medical abortion pills or take dangerous actions in an attempt to self-terminate.

Following are things ASN clients have done before finding out about our organisation and the help available:

• Ingested floor cleaner and bleach
• Taken multiple packets of birth control pills with excessive amounts of alcohol
• Tried to figure out how to crash a car to cause a miscarriage but not permanent injury or death
• Taken heroin for the first time in the hopes that as a non-drug user the shock would cause a miscarriage
• Googled “how to self abort”
• Gone to disreputable money lenders to ask for loans
• Skipped paying rent
• Sold the family car
• Rationed food for the family
• Overdosed on over the counter medication

And the list goes on. Put simply, this is a terrible, untenable position. It is a complete outrage that women who live in part of the United Kingdom do not have access to the same NHS that women in the rest of the UK do. It is also very important to note that there are women in Northern Ireland who, even with financial assistance, are unable to access abortions in England or elsewhere abroad. These women are trapped by the following scenarios:

• The majority of women who have abortions already have children. In countries where abortion is illegal, stigma often means that women are afraid to tell anyone that they are pregnant. We can help with the cost of childcare, but we don’t have a network of childcare providers who can arrive at someone’s home at 5am and stay until midnight, which is how much time it takes to travel to England for a safe abortion and return home. In many cases, for this reason and due to secrecy and shame, a mother living in Ireland is forced to have another baby.
• Many of our clients are in or escaping relationships with abusive partners. Many abusive men will not use birth control, will sabotage birth control, and will use pregnancy to control their partners, as it’s hard to leave your abuser when you are pregnant and looking after small children. We can give these women the funding to travel, but cannot whisk away their partners for a day or more so that they can leave the house safely. In these cases, women whose partners are violent and controlling are forced to have a baby.
• Recently, we’ve become aware of a new type of situation a woman seeking abortion may find herself in. Most women travelling from Ireland, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man are able to have abortions at UK clinics.BPAS, Marie Stopes, and NUPAS all have reduced prices for clients travelling from overseas. But some women have health issues that mean that their abortions must take place in a hospital. Due to a reduction in the provision of services, there is only one NHS hospital in England that will provide that care, and it will only provide that care up to 12 weeks and 5 days into a pregnancy. A few months back, we heard from a woman from Northern Ireland who didn’t realise she was pregnant until her second trimester, as she believed she had been sterilised after her youngest child was born. Due to a respiratory disorder, she was unable to access an abortion in a UK clinic. We called everywhere, we begged, we pleaded; no one could help. She was therefore forced to have a baby.

This is the true cost of criminalising abortion. Many women will be able to get around the law. These women have friends and family who are supportive, or jobs that mean they can fund themselves. Others will risk imprisonment and take safe but illegal early medical abortion pills. Some will be pointed towards the Abortion Support Network, and we can help remove some of the obstacles. But the true costs of criminalisation are the women who miss these opportunities. The women without internet access. The women in abusive relationships. The women who don’t know ASN exists. The women with physical health issues. These are the women who haunt us and we very much hope this committee decides to call on the Northern Ireland Office to work with the Northern Ireland Assembly in order to extend free, safe, legal abortions to those resident in Northern Ireland.

About

FPA is one of the UK’s leading sexual health charities.

Our mission is to champion people’s right to sexual and reproductive health and wellbeing through advocacy, information, education and campaigning.

We do this through providing evidence-based sexual health information to the public and professionals. FPA provides sexuality and relationships education programmes and campaigns for high-quality education and sexual health services. We also offer training to professionals.

Our programme of work also includes the provision of the only impartial pregnancy choices and post-abortion counselling service in Northern Ireland. Our two centres in Belfast and Derry/Londonderry support around 300 women each year, who access the service through our helpline or by referral from a GP or sexual health clinic.

To find out more about FPA and our work, please visit: www.fpa.org.uk

Introduction and summary

FPA welcomes the launch of the Women and Equalities Select Committee enquiry into the Government’s plans for achieving the UN Sustainable Development Goal 5 (SDG5). As our expertise lies in the production and promotion of evidence-based sexual and reproductive health information, our submission will focus on the aim to ‘ensure universal access to sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights’, with particular reference to Northern Ireland’s highly restrictive abortion legislation.

As the 1967 Abortion Act does not apply in Northern Ireland, access to abortion is covered by sections 58 and 59 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861. A woman found in direct contravention of the Act will be put in ‘penal servitude for life’. Section 25 (1) of the Criminal Justice Act (Northern Ireland) 1945 states that ‘no person shall be found guilty of an offence under this section unless it is proved that the act which caused the death of the child was not done in good faith for the purpose only of preserving the life of the mother.’ The ‘life of the mother’ in this context has been interpreted by the courts as including her physical and mental health. The adverse effect on her mental or physical health must be a ‘real and serious’ one, and must also be ‘permanent or long term’.

As a result of this legislation, only 16 abortions were carried out in Northern Ireland in 2014/15[1]. Instead, 833[2] women were forced to travel from Northern Ireland to England and Wales to access services that would have been freely available in any other part of the UK, with many more risking prosecution by taking safe but illegal abortion medication sourced online.

In April this year a woman was handed a three month suspended sentence for self-inducing an abortion in Northern Ireland, because she could not afford the cost of travel to England and the expense of a private procedure[3].

The situation is a clear violation of human rights and in direct opposition to the aims of SDG5. Throughout our submission, we aim to answer some the Committee’s questions by providing:

• A background to the situation in Northern Ireland, with reference to human rights legislation
• The UK Government’s current position
• What action the UK Government needs to take in order to achieve universal access to sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights

We would welcome the opportunity to provide further evidence if called upon.

Violation of reproductive rights in Northern Ireland  

As explained in the introduction, abortion legislation in Northern Ireland prevents women from accessing sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights, as required for the UK to meet the aims of SDG5.

International conventions

As a signatory to UN conventions, the UK has already been criticised by the UN on its failure to meet its duties in regard to reproductive rights. In 2009 the Committee on the Elimination of All Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) called on the UK Government to ‘initiate a process of public consultation in Northern Ireland on the abortion law….[and also] give consideration to the amendment of the abortion law so as to remove punitive provisions imposed on women who undergo abortion.’[4]  Again in 2013, the Committee restated that, ‘the State party [UK Government] should expedite the amendment of the anti-abortion law in Northern Ireland with a view to decriminalise abortion.’[5]

In 2016, the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights also stated its concern that ‘termination of pregnancy in Northern Ireland is still criminalised in all circumstances except when the life of the woman is in danger’ and recommended that the UK ‘amend the legislation on termination of pregnancy in Northern Ireland to make it compatible with other fundamental rights, such as women’s rights to health, life and dignity.’[6] In the same year, the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child also called for the decriminalisation of abortion ‘with a view to ensuring girls’ access to safe abortion and post-abortion care services.’[7]

UK court judgements

UK courts have also found the law to be a violation of reproductive rights. In November 2015, the High Court in Belfast ruled that prohibition of abortion in cases of fatal foetal abnormality and sexual crime violated UK human rights commitments, specifically the right to private and family life under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.[8]

After further submissions, the Court found it was not possible to read the present legal framework in a way that protected Article 8 and so section 4 of the Human Rights Act 1998 was used to issue a declaration of incompatibility which places the onus on the legislature to remedy the incompatibility through legislative reform. This was a significant move by the Northern Ireland High Court, one of only 30 declarations of incompatibility made across the UK since 2000 and one of two made by Northern Irish courts.

The UK Government’s current position

In the context of international development, the UK Government supports universal reproductive rights. The Department for International Development (DfID), in a range of publications, has indicated that it considers safe and legal abortion a right. In 2014, for example, a DfID document outlining policy on abortion stated that ‘women and adolescent girls must have the right to make their own decisions about their sexual and reproductive health and well-being, and be able to choose whether, when and how many children to have… Safe abortion reduces recourse to unsafe abortion and saves maternal lives… In countries where it is highly restricted and maternal mortality and morbidity are high, we can help make the consequences of unsafe abortion more widely understood, and can consider supporting processes of legal and policy reform”[9].

However, the UK has not engaged the Northern Ireland Assembly through ‘processes of legal and policy reform’, instead stating that abortion is a health issue, with sole responsibility lying with the Northern Ireland Assembly. For example, in 2016, then-Leader of the House Chris Grayling MP (responding to a question about prosecution) stated that: “I am not personally in favour of women who seek an abortion being punished for doing so, but, of course, this is a devolved matter. We have taken a conscious decision to pass that matter into the hands of the Northern Ireland Assembly, and I am afraid that we cannot easily have it both ways”[10].

This is also the response of the Northern Ireland Office. In answer to a Written Question, then-Northern Ireland Minister Ben Wallace MP stated that “The issue of abortion in Northern Ireland is a matter devolved to the Northern Ireland Assembly”[11].

However, progress in the Assembly is slow. The power-sharing Government in Northern Ireland does not supports significant reform in the law. Research has shown that debates in the Assembly are most often high on anti-abortion rhetoric and low on practical approaches to extending reproductive rights.[12]

As recently as February 2016, the Assembly voted 59 to 40 not to legislate to allow abortion even when a fatal foetal abnormality has been detected. The Assembly also voted 64 to 32 against legislation which would provide exemptions if a woman or girl was the victim of sexual crime[13]. Abortion in these situations remains a criminal offence with a sentence of up to life imprisonment. This demonstrates that changing public opinion is not being taken into account, with a recent Amnesty International UK poll reporting that 72% of people support a change in the law.[14]

In order to achieve ‘universal access to sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights’, the UK Government needs to open a dialogue with the Assembly, working in partnership to deliver change.

Achieving SDG5

In the UK, women have been and continue to be prosecuted for accessing safe but illegal abortion medication, with the most recent case reported in October 2016.[15] Women with means are able to travel from Northern Ireland to Great Britain and pay for private procedures, leaving those without financial resources at highest risk.

Despite the concerning increases in prosecution and multiple judgements by international bodies and UK courts, there seems to be little will within the UK Government to recognise responsibility for Northern Ireland’s restrictive abortion legislation, as demonstrated through repeated ministerial statements that it is a ‘health issue’ and therefore a matter for the Northern Ireland Assembly alone.

This cannot continue. The UK is failing to meet the ambitious requirements set out by SDG5, as Northern Ireland’s restrictive abortion legislation violates human rights and discriminates against women and girls.

We urge the Committee to call on the Northern Ireland Office (which holds responsibility for protecting human rights in Northern Ireland) to proactively engage with the Northern Ireland Assembly in order to extend reproductive rights.

For more information on fpa’s work in Northern Ireland

[1] Northern Ireland termination of pregnancy statistics, 2014/15 (Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety, 2016) https://www.health-ni.gov.uk/news/northern-ireland-termination-pregnancy-statistics-201415

[2] Abortion Statistics, England and Wales: 2015 (Department of Health, 2016) https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/570040/Updated_Abortion_Statistics_2015.pdf

[3] Northern Ireland woman who bought abortion pills given suspended prison sentence (Belfast Telegraph, 2016) http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/northern-ireland-woman-who-bought-abortion-pills-given-suspended-prison-sentence-34597487.html

[4] Concluding Observations regarding the United Kingdom (CEDAW, 2009) http://docstore.ohchr.org/SelfServices/FilesHandler.ashx?enc=6QkG1d%2fPPRiCAqhKb7yhsvglKm%2f71Q4iogAZSMgJYVtfejF48hHZ5kPQbcJTVDMbsiyAQsMiUFbUhCFmudQTE8qIl8Mg1QIVFwkJtOqmeK03ZvY82v3OJxLHlRo%2bVuVP

[5] Concluding Observations regarding the United Kingdom (CEDAW, 2013) http://docstore.ohchr.org/SelfServices/FilesHandler.ashx?enc=6QkG1d%2fPPRiCAqhKb7yhsldCrOlUTvLRFDjh6%2fx1pWB8bSlKfa34XmmIN3lG11hwWhjFqrEprJHQfoipZTwnVkhDALmzaR6gCklPapM2exTMh89SX7GUOJHbH%2bN8Qq9U

[6] Concluding observations (CESCR, 2016) http://docstore.ohchr.org/SelfServices/FilesHandler.ashx?enc=4slQ6QSmlBEDzFEovLCuW3XRinAE8KCBFoqOHNz%2fvuCC%2bTxEKAI18bzE0UtfQhJkxxOSGuoMUxHGypYLjNFkwxnMR6GmqogLJF8BzscMe9zpGfTXBkZ4pEaigi44xqiL

[7] Concluding observations (CRC, 2016) http://docstore.ohchr.org/SelfServices/FilesHandler.ashx?enc=6QkG1d%2fPPRiCAqhKb7yhskHOj6VpDS%2f%2fJqg2Jxb9gncnUyUgbnuttBweOlylfyYPkBbwffitW2JurgBRuMMxZqnGgerUdpjxij3uZ0bjQBOLNTNvQ9fUIEOvA5LtW0GL

[8] Court declares abortion law in Northern Ireland breaches European Convention on Human Rights by failing to provide exceptions to ban (Northern Ireland Courts and Tribunal Service, 2015)

http://www.courtsni.gov.uk/en-GB/Judicial%20Decisions/SummaryJudgments/Documents/Court%20declares%20abortion%20law%20in%20Northern%20Ireland%20breaches%20European%20Convention%20on%20Human%20Rights%20by%20faili/j_j_Summary%20of%20judgment%20-%20In%20Re%20NIHRC%20(Termination%20of%20Pregnancy)%2030.11.15.htm

[9] Safe and unsafe abortion: The UK’s policy position on safe and unsafe abortion in developing countries (DfID, 2014) https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/324590/safe-unsafe-abortion2.pdf

[10] Business of the House, 14 April 2016 (Hansard, 2016) https://goo.gl/e7KWvN

[11] Abortion: Northern Ireland: Written question – 8921 (House of Commons Publications and Records, 2016) http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/written-questions-answers-statements/written-question/Commons/2015-09-04/8921/

[12] Critiquing Recent Abortion Law and Policy in NI (Fiona Bloomer and Eileen Fegan, 2013) Critical Social Policy 34: 109-120 http://csp.sagepub.com/content/early/2013/08/16/0261018313496190

[13] Official Report: Wednesday 10 February 2016 (Northern Ireland Assembly 2016) http://aims.niassembly.gov.uk/officialreport/report.aspx?&eveDate=2016/02/10&docID=258728

[14] Northern Ireland: Nearly 3/4 of public support abortion law change (Amnesty International UK, 2016) https://www.amnesty.org.uk/press-releases/northern-ireland-nearly-34-public-support-abortion-law-change-new-poll-0

[15] NI woman charged over abortion pills (BBC, 2016) http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-37789341

On Thursday 27th October 2016 the BBC reported that another woman in Northern Ireland has been charged with using abortion pills. The article said almost nothing about the circumstances of the case, but included false and biased information about the risks of abortion medication and omitted important facts from experts and reputable sources.

This briefing, clarifying the facts about medical abortion, draws on a complaint made to the BBC by Marge Berer of the International Campaign for a Woman’s Right to Safe Abortion. You can make an online complaint to the BBC here, or phone 03700 100 222.

Assertion: There are now warnings that women are putting their health at risk by taking abortion pills bought online.

FACT: Medical abortion pills are extremely safe. They are one of several methods of abortion recommended by the World Health Organization and on the WHO Essential Medicines List. While there are dubious sources of the pills online, there are also a number of bona fide sources, which most women are using.

When drugs are seized by N. Ireland customs, or women are prosecuted for buying or using them the source and safety of the drugs is not investigated because women’s criminality, not their safety, is the key concern of Northern Ireland law enforcement.

Assertion: The drugs cause blood loss and some people are likely to need treatment if they use them.

FACT: Medical abortion pills are intended to cause an abortion, so they do cause blood loss, but not in the way this journalist implies. The great majority of women who use the pills do not need treatment.

If Northern Ireland had an abortion service, providing reassurance, follow up advice and treatment would be part of its remit as it is for services in other parts of the UK.

The same drugs are used across the UK to treat incomplete miscarriage and women use them safely at home.

Assertion: “a number of women will actually require a blood transfusion.”

FACT: This is very rare – affecting fewer than 1 in 1000 women having an abortion before 13 weeks, according to guidance from the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists 

Assertion: “There are risks associated with this drug’s use,” said Dr Paul McCague of the School of Pharmacy at Queen’s.

FACT: There are risks associated with every approved medication on the market and in pharmacies. The implication here is that abortion medication is particularly risky. In fact, abortion using medical abortion pills is one of the safest known medical procedures.

Assertion: “Of particular concern with this drug would be the heavy bleeding which is a relatively common adverse effect.”

FACT: Bleeding is a central aspect of medical abortion, not an adverse effect.  In the rest of the UK women can seek help – without the fear of prosecution – if they have concerns about the extent of bleeding following medical abortion.

Assertion: “in recent months campaigners have staged a series of stunts…”

FACT: People demonstrating for the right to safe abortion in Northern Ireland have undertaken a range of activities to draw attention to abortion prosecutions and to the lack of NHS funding for women in Northern Ireland who are forced to travel to the mainland for abortions. Actions have included people handing themselves into police stations, risking prosecution themselves for using or supplying abortion medication.

However, criticisms of the total abortion prohibition in Northern Ireland have also come from the United Nations Human Rights Committee, a High Court Judge in Northern Ireland, a range of civil society groups in Northern Ireland, and politicians in both Stormont and Westminster.

Assertion: “There are fears that many who order pharmaceuticals online cannot be sure what they will receive.”

FACT: The article fails to mention that there are three international web-based distance medicine providers who supply bona fide medical abortion pills along with counselling and access to help if needed.

Assertion: A police statement said: “The PSNI has a statutory duty under Section 32 of the Police (NI) Act 2000 to protect life…”

 FACT:The police in this instance are clearly interpreting this to mean the life of the fetus, although fetal life is not specified in the Act

Assertion: A statement from the Department of Justice stated that “The current law prohibits the use of abortion drugs throughout the UK,”

FACT: In fact abortion medication mifepristone was licensed for use in Britain in 1991 and is routinely prescribed to women within the terms of the 1967 Abortion Act. In 2015 medical abortion comprised 45% of all abortions carried out in England and Wales and over 80% in Scotland (in 2014).

The bulk of the article emphasises that self-use of medical abortion pills is illegal under an archaic law that was passed in 1861: a law that was modified by the Abortion Act in the rest of the UK nearly 50 years ago, and which many people in the UK believe should be removed from the statute books entirely.

The second half stresses how many people including MLAs in Northern Ireland are anti-abortion, but doesn’t mention the cohort of pro-choice MLAs, or opinion polls which show an increasing majority of people support abortion reform.

According to bpas:

Adverse events following medical abortion use are extremely unlikely, but women may not seek help as they know they are committing a criminal offence

A free helpline will provide reassurance and advice to women who have taken pills in countries where abortion is severely restricted

The helpline will be advertised in Ireland, Northern Ireland, and the Isle of Man

Aftercare helpline numbers (PLEASE DO NOT USE THESE NUMBERS FOR PRESS ENQUIRIES)

From Ireland: 1800 910 049

From Northern Ireland: 0800 077 6049

From the Isle of Man: 0800 077 6049

The recent medical abortion prosecutions have highlighted once again the injustice of Northern Ireland’s prohibitive abortion law. We celebrate women’s access to safe medical abortion which means that women who are unable to travel to the mainland can have safe abortions at home where once they would have put their lives at risk in the backstreets. However, we deplore the fact that they must still risk life imprisonment for doing so.

I know there is growing support for your struggle. I hope today’s march will inspire more people to challenge the status quo in Northern Ireland and send a message to Westminster that women’s rights are human rights and must be respected and protected.

Yours in solidarity,
Lisa Hallgarten

Today’s action – described as an ‘all-Island act of solidarity’ clearly demonstrates that by land, sea and air, abortion pills are everywhere. According to Dr. Rebecca Gomperts from Women on Waves, which supported the action, stated: “Research by the world health organisation has proven that an abortion with pills can be done safely at home by women themselves till 10 weeks of pregnancy. The health impact is similar to a miscarriage.  Restrictive abortion laws will not keep women from accessing abortion pills, by ship, by mail, through the internet, drone or RC speedboat!”

The action comes as both countries face the charge that their abortion laws are in contravention of women’s human rights. This week the high court in Belfast will consider the Attorney General’s appeal against a judge’s ruling that Northern Ireland’s abortion laws do not comply with the European Convention on Human Rights in cases of fatal foetal abnormality or sexual crime. Earlier this month a panel of experts from the United Nations Human Rights Committee ruled that the Republic of Ireland’s legal prohibition of abortion subjects women to “discrimination and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment”.

It is clear now that abortion pills know no borders. They cannot be blocked from reaching women. The question is how much longer we will have to stand by and watch women being criminalised and punished for using them.