
From 19th century to present day: Abortion laws in Scotland
This will become law if the provision remains unamended by the Lords during its forthcoming scrutiny of the bill.
Some Scottish Labour MPs, including Katrina Murray who spoke to The Herald about her plea to the Scottish Government this weekend, have been calling for Scotland to follow suit.
But should they and, fundamentally, can they?
Before we answer that, let's take a look at the situation down South.
Situation down South
In England and Wales, the Offences Against the Person Act of 1861 criminalises anyone who uses instruments or administers 'poisons' to a woman with intent to cause her to miscarry.
Section 58 and 59 of this act renders a woman who acts to end her own pregnancy or anyone who facilitates a woman obtaining an abortion criminally culpable.
Section 60, has the bespoke offence of concealing a pregnancy.
Under this, if the prosecution are able to show that you were pregnant and either a dead child has shown up that can be linked to you or there is no child despite the fact you were pregnant that can be criminal.
This legislation does not cover Scotland, as specifically stated in section 78 of the act itself.
Read more:
Lucy Grieve: Scotland Must Press On With Abortion Law Reform
Abortion Laws in Scotland
So what is the situation in Scotland?
Legal academic at Strathclyde University, Dr Jonathan Brown told The Herald the laws around abortion in Scotland are 'radically different' to those in England and Wales.
'The Scottish laws relating to abortion has almost nothing in common with the law relating to abortion in the rest of the UK, including Northern Ireland,' he said.
Instead, abortion is criminalised by Common Law, however, there remains widespread confusion and uncertainty over whether a woman could be prosecuted as they have been in England.
Under this, while prosecution of women and pregnant people seems unlikely, legal academic Dr Lynsey Mitchel argues that 'it is not something that can be guaranteed.'
Another piece of abortion legislation covering Scotland is the UK Abortion Act passed in 1967 which excludes Northern Ireland.
In section 5 of this act, it states that 'anything done with intent to procure a woman's miscarriage' is unlawfully done (unless authorised by section one of the act).
Under this law, all abortions still require two doctors' signatures, and women must meet specific legal criteria to qualify for an abortion which essentially means that not wanting to be pregnant is not a valid reason to have an abortion.
There's also the much older Concealment of Birth Scotland Act of 1809.
Dr Brown explained: "What it does is essentially give rise to an evidentiary presumption that a woman has killed her own child that was born alive if she concealed her pregnancy.
'The prosecution don't need to prove the baby was born because it is designed to cover cases where a woman can be shown to have been pregnant and no child has appeared at all.
"So it's got that latent flexibility in it that means that the prosecution don't need to prove the child was born alive. It then puts the burden on the woman to prove that she either aborted or gave birth to a still born child."
This was the main piece of legislation used in Scotland to prosecute women for abortions or a long time, the academic tells The Herald.
'In the 19th century, that's the statute being used to prosecute women until the amount of women prosecuted for this drops off in the 20th century,' he said.
Dr Brown said the 1809 act is a 'problematic' and 'discriminatory' piece of legislation which he said needs to see reform.
He explained: 'What it does is essentially give rise to an evidentiary presumption that a woman has killed her own child that was born alive if she concealed her pregnancy.
'The prosecution don't need to prove the baby was born because it is designed to cover cases where a woman can be shown to have been pregnant and no child has appeared at all so it's got that latent flexibility in it that means that the prosecution don't need to prove the child was born alive.
"It then puts the burden on the woman to prove that she either aborted or gave birth to a still born child.
'For all that this is openly discriminatory and quite harsh, it is actually a piece of legislation that is brought in for reasons of mercy because before 1809, it was act the mothering of children that applied here which meant that if you were convicted under these circumstances you were guilty of the crime of murder, a capital crime at the time.'
Under the 1809 act, the maximum sentence for concealing abortion is two years.
Between 1922 and present day, The Herald understands five women have been prosecuted under this 1809 statute in Scotland.
There has been one 21st century case involving a woman in respect of her own child. Any other abortion case has involved abortion providers.
Out of all these cases, no woman was acquitted.
'If it's brought in, it tends to be a conviction or a plea,' said Dr Brown, who has scoured the archives on these cases.
He added: 'In England and Wales…there has been an uptick in the number of prosecutions brought, there hasn't been anything like that in Scotland.', he said.
How does this fit in with the legal limit of 24 weeks?
Across the UK, the legal limit for an abortion is 24 weeks into the gestation period.
Dr Brown stressed that when considering illegality beyond this time period in the 1967 act, it is looking specifically at medical professionals.
'When it is talking about criminality in the context of the act, it is talking about the criminality of doctors who don't comply with what is expected of them. It doesn't criminalise woman.' he stressed.
'One of our institutional writers, David Shum, stated the foetus in Scots law is nothing more than part of the mother's body and self-harm is not criminal and, if the foetus is a part of the self, the woman acting to harm it is not criminally culpable.'
Although a woman who procures drugs illegally to end her pregnancy may not be guilty of the crime around abortion laws, she may be guilty of another crime such as possession of a controlled substances under the Misuse of Drugs Act.
'The only way I can see a women being prosecuted [in Scotland for abortion] is if a woman gets pregnant, doesn't tell anyone at all that she is in fact pregnant and then having secreted the fact of her pregnancy from absolutely everyone, does something at a sufficient at a sufficiently late stage of the pregnancy in a circumstance that leaves evidence of a child that could have been born alive.
'In that circumstance, the 1809 act could be applied.'
What action is the Scottish Government taking?
The Scottish Government has set up an expert group to review the law on abortion and advise on whether it should be changed.
The Herald understands proposals from the group are expected to be published in late August or early September.
Hashtags

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


Wales Online
20 minutes ago
- Wales Online
PIP changes explained with fears it will hugely impact Wales
PIP changes explained with fears it will hugely impact Wales What the PIP changes could mean for benefits claimants in Wales ahead of crunch vote Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall arrives in Downing Street for today's cabinet meeting ahead of the crucial welfare reform vote (Image: PA ) MPs will tonight vote on UK Government plans to reform welfare payments. It comes after a climbdown by the Labour administration after huge public outcry and facing a huge rebellion from its own MPs. At its height more than 100 Labour MPs said they would vote against their own government, but that has reduced to 39 Labour backbenchers since changes were announced. Wales' four Plaid Cymru MPs have also backed the amendment, which will be voted on. The proposals were hugely controversial. While the UK Government say reform is needed, critics said they were being rushed through and had not consulted charities or disabled people who will be impacted. For our free daily briefing on the biggest issues facing the nation, sign up to the Wales Matters newsletter here . Work and pensions secretary Liz Kendall told the Commons: "Welfare reform, let's be honest, is never easy, perhaps especially for Labour governments. Our social security system directly touches the lives of millions of people and it is something we all care deeply about. "We have listened to the concerns that have been raised to help us get these changes right. The Bill protects people already claiming PIP, it protects in real terms the incomes of people already receiving the UC (universal credit) health top-up from that benefit and their standard allowance, and it protects those with severe lifelong conditions who will never work, and those near the end of their life as we promised we would." The Welsh Government had criticised the plans, with senior minister Jane Hutt writing to Ms Kendall saying there needed to be a review of the plans. Once the climbdown was announced, it was welcomed by First Minister Eluned Morgan. She said: "Around 200,000 people could have been in real trouble, and they've listened, they've learned and they've acted – and that is something I think we should welcome." Article continues below What is PIP? Personal Independence Payment (PIP) is a non-means-tested benefit intended to help with extra costs arising from long-term disability or ill-health which was introduced in 2013. It replaced Disability Living Allowance for people of working age. PIP is made up of two components: a mobility component, based on an individual's ability to get around; and a 'daily living' component, based on ability to carry out other key activities necessary to be able to participate in daily life. Each component can be awarded at either standard, enhanced, or nil (where they receive nothing). What was proposed? The UK Government had proposed sweeping changes that were deeply unpopular there were two main elements: Increasing the basic 'standard allowance' of Universal Credit that all claimants receive, while reducing the generosity of the additional amounts for claimants with disabilities and health conditions that affect their capability for work In terms of PIP, changes to the way eligibility is calculated - claimants would need to score four or more points for at least one of the 'daily living' activities that determine entitlement to the daily living component Now what is happening? The UK Government announced two major changes the new Personal Independence Payment daily living 'four-point' requirement will only be implemented for new claimants from November 2026 existing recipients of the Universal Credit health element, and any new claimant meeting the criteria for the most severe and lifelong conditions, will "have their incomes fully protected in real terms" Why is it so important in Wales? There was a lack of official government data about exactly who would be impacted in Wales but it was widely commented that there would be a disproportionate impact in Wales because Wales has higher rates of disabled people of working age than the UK average. The Joseph Rowntree Foundation highlighted the constituencies where cuts to sickness and disability benefits will fall most heavily which showed of the top 20 constituencies in England and Wales with the highest proportion of the working age population in receipt of health-related social security, eight are in Wales (and 10 out of the top 30) which suggested changing PIP would have a disproportionate impact on disabled people in Wales. In fact, Welsh Government minister Jane Hutt wrote to her UK Government counterpart and said that element needed to be reviewed. "The proposed changes to Personal Independence Payments should be reviewed before any changes are made," she wrote. Policy in Practice estimated there will be substantial increases in poverty and financial hardship for working age households in Wales. The original plans would have impacted an estimated 190,000 people in Wales (6.1% of the population) and see £470m lost from the Welsh economy. Victoria Winckler, director of The Bevan Foundation, said it would "increase social inequality, and exacerbating already entrenched poverty in Wales". Are the changes better news? There are still concerns that the row back is going to create a two-tier system and younger disabled people and those who become disabled in the future will be disadvantaged and denied access to work and education. The concessions by the UK Government have seen a number of the Welsh MPs who had signed an amendment which looked set to sink the government plans has decreased. While Plaid Cymru's four MPs have signed the amendment, only one of the five Labour MPs who had originally put their names to it have kept there, that's Steve Witherden, the MP for Montgomeryshire and Glyndwr. However, a huge number of charity groups say the changes don't go far enough. Since the revisions, groups and charities including Citizens Advice, The Poverty Alliance and The Salvation Army have co-signed a letter saying they want the bill withdrawn. There has not, the groups say, been enough consultation. That was echoed by Luke Young, head of policy at Citizens Advice who asked MPs to vote against the bill. "The UK government's own impact assessment says the cuts will plunge 150,000 people into poverty by the end of this Parliament. Even this is an underestimate of the potential impact. If this Bill is passed, then by 2030 it will have cut PIP for more than 400,000 disabled people and Universal Credit for more than 700,000 people who are disabled or have a long-term health condition. Article continues below "We know Wales will be disproportionately affected, with communities such as Blaenau Gwent, Caerphilly and Neath Port Talbot being hardest hit. It will push more people toward already stretched public services and into to food banks, as they find even less support available under a new three tier system."


Daily Mirror
33 minutes ago
- Daily Mirror
Mirror's Daily Digest - heat health warning to longest ever cold case conviction
In this Tuesday's Mirror Daily Digest, we've pulled together the biggest stories of the day from the country's longest ever cold case conviction to a common prescription drug warning Welcome to the Mirror's Daily Digest, where we'll be pulling together all the best stories of the day from our News, Royal, Politics teams and more. This Tuesday, we're bringing you inside the newsroom with coverage on the country's longest ever cold case conviction through to the amber health alert. Our Politics team has been following the latest on Keir Starmer's major rebellion threat, with a key vote on welfare reforms later today. Meanwhile, we've also covered the arrest of three ex-members of the senior leadership team at a hospital where Lucy Letby worked in connection with alleged manslaughter. Ryland Headley, 92, to die in jail for 1967 rape and murder of Louisa Dunne, 75 Our News team has been closely following the country's longest ever cold case conviction, in which a 92-year-old man has been sentenced to life in prison - with a minimum term of 20 years - for the rape and murder of an elderly widow in 1967. Ryland Headley claimed he was innocent but was caught after his DNA was found back in the 60s and re-tested with modern forensic techniques. He was found guilty after a trial at Bristol Crown Court of killing 75-year-old Louisa Dunne in her own home. The twice-widowed woman was found dead by a neighbour in her home in the Easton area of Bristol on June 28, 1967. She was fully dressed, but had her knickers round her ankles and a nylon type stocking lying across her neck. She had been strangled. DWP chief Liz Kendall beams outside No10 despite brewing welfare rebellion Meanwhile, our Politics team has been working around the clock to provide live updates as Keir Starmer faces rebellion over the controversial welfare cuts. This evening, MPs are due to vote on reforms - first set out in March - with the government bracing for a huge revolt from angry Labour MPs. Ministers hope major concessions will be enough to win over Labour rebels. Welfare chief Liz Kendall was this morning seen smiling as she put on a positive face ahead of this afternoon's debate. She yesterday defended the massive DWP shake-up after a bruising week for the government over controversial disability cuts. While some Labour MPs have said they will back the government after last week's concessions, which will protect current claimants, some 50-60 of them are still said to be considering voting against the government. It would be the biggest revolt of Mr Starmer's premiership so far. Common prescription drugs that can be fatal when taken in scorching 35C heat In other news, an amber health alert has been issued in parts of the UK for the second time in two weeks amid the sweltering heatwave. The UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) issues the alert during periods of extreme heat, which could impact people's health and wellbeing and therefore put strain on public services like the NHS. The amber warning means the entire population could be at risk from the extreme heat, with travel likely to be disrupted, and more ambulances needed. Experts have warned that five million Brits could be at a further increased health risk due to a common prescription medication: antidepressants. One of the common side effects of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) is sweating more than normal - and in a heatwave this can present a danger, experts have claimed. Three former bosses at Lucy Letby hospital arrested This morning, our News team reported that three ex-members of the senior leadership team at the hospital where Lucy Letby worked have been arrested in connection with alleged manslaughter. The three were in leadership roles at the Countess of Chester Hospital in 2015 and 2016, but have not been named. They were arrested on suspicion of gross negligence manslaughter. It comes after Letby, 35, was found guilty of murdering seven children as well as attempting to murder seven more between June 2015 and June 2016. She had been working at the neonatal unit at the hospital at the time. Finally, former Minister of State for Home Affairs Norman Baker has slammed Buckingham Palace 'pretending to be prudent' as 'utter hogwash'. It comes as the Royal Family's accounts for 2024 to 2025 have been revealed, showing the Firm spent a total of £2.7million last year on travel by private jet, helicopters and rail. In an opinion piece for the Mirror, Norman wrote: 'Buckingham Palace pretends the royals are being prudent with public money. What utter hogwash. They even have the cheek to suggest that Charles is being generous because he only takes 12% of the income of the Crown Estate. 'Reality check: the Crown Estate has in effect been a public body since 1760, and until 2011, 100% of its profits went to the Treasury to pay for schools, hospitals, defence and, yes, disability benefits. This 12% is a new royal tax on the public purse.' He added: 'The shocking truth is that the royals really don't care how much public money they spend. Last year they incredibly ran up a bill for the taxpayer of almost £1.2m on charter flights just within Great Britain to places as difficult to reach as Glasgow, Edinburgh and Newcastle.'


Glasgow Times
35 minutes ago
- Glasgow Times
Two arrests after Palestine Action claims blocking Israeli defence firm UK site
It comes ahead of proposed legislation that will ban the group under anti-terror law. Avon and Somerset Police said a 30-year-old woman and a 36-year-old man, both from London, have been arrested on suspicion of criminal damage, unauthorised entry to a prohibited place and locking onto a person, object or land to cause serious disruption. Earlier on Tuesday, a Palestine Action spokesperson said activists had blocked the entrance to Elbit Systems in Bristol, and covered it in red paint 'to symbolise Palestinian bloodshed'. Avon and Somerset Police said officers were called to the site at around 6.30am. A spokeswoman said: 'Two people have been arrested following a small protest outside a premises at the Aztec West Business Park, in Almondsbury. 'They remain in police custody and inquiries are ongoing. 'We're committed to facilitating people's right to peaceful protest, but will not tolerate any criminal behaviour.' The incident comes as a draft order was laid before Parliament on Monday to amend the Terrorism Act 2000 to include Palestine Action as a proscribed organisation. If approved, it would become a criminal offence punishable by up to 14 years in prison to be a member of the direct action group or to support it. MPs and peers are expected to debate the legislation on Wednesday and Thursday and, if approved, the ban could come into force by Friday. A Palestine Action spokesperson said: 'While the Government is rushing through Parliament absurd legislation to proscribe Palestine Action, the real terrorism is being committed in Gaza. 'Palestine Action affirms that direct action is necessary in the face of Israel's ongoing crimes against humanity of genocide, apartheid, and occupation, and to end British facilitation of those crimes.' The group also occupied the rooftop of UK subcontractor Guardtech Group, the spokesperson added. Officers are also at the scene at the site in Brandon, Suffolk. A Suffolk Police spokesman said: 'Officers and specialist negotiators are currently at the location and our immediate priority is to bring this to a conclusion and to ensure the safety of everyone at the scene.' Palestine Action is seeking a legal challenge against the Government's bid to proscribe it, with a hearing expected on Friday to decide whether the ban can be temporarily blocked, pending further proceedings to decide whether a legal challenge can be brought. Commenting on the proscription on Monday, Home Secretary Yvette Cooper said: 'The right to protest and the right to free speech are the cornerstone of our democracy and there are countless campaign groups that freely exercise those rights. 'Violence and serious criminal damage has no place in legitimate protests.'