Calls for abortion law change grew louder as number of prosecutions rose
Until 2022, it is believed that only three women had ever been convicted of having an illegal abortion in the 150 years since 1861, when the procedure was made illegal under the Offences Against the Person Act.
But in the last four years, at least half a dozen women have found themselves in the dock of a crown court accused of ending their pregnancy, and dozens more have been arrested or investigated by police.
Two high-profile cases in particular fuelled the calls for change. Carla Foster was jailed in 2023 for an illegal abortion, before having her sentence suspended a month later by the court of appeal. And just weeks ago, Nicola Packer was cleared by a jury after spending almost five years facing the threat of prison.
Related: British women are being jailed under archaic abortion laws. MPs can act to end that this week | Frances Ryan
Thirteen people, both men and women, made a first appearance at magistrates court charged with abortion-related offences in 2022, according to freedom of information data from the Crown Prosecution Service, compared with four people in 2019 and three in both 2020 and 2021.
Data from about half of Britain's police forces showed at least 11 people were arrested in 2023 on suspicion of child destruction or inducing a miscarriage, including a 31-year-old woman in north Wales 'reported to have taken illicit substances to initiate an abortion'.
There are several more known cases of women arrested in the past 18 months that are not included in the data.
In the last parliament, Diana Johnson, now a Home Office minister, attempted to change the law by bringing an amendment to the previous government's criminal justice bill, but the 2024 general election meant the legislation never made its way through parliament.
Parliament had already brought in a move towards more liberal abortion laws. In 2020 telemedicine brought the biggest reform to abortion provision in England and Wales since the 1967 Abortion Act, which set out the current framework by which terminations can be carried out.
Instead of women seeking a termination in the first 10 weeks of pregnancy needing to take the first pill under medical supervision, they could receive both pills by post after a remote consultation.
Although it was introduced as an emergency measure during the pandemic, telemedicine was made permanent in 2022, with MPs voting 215 in favour to 188 against. The same year, parliament also voted 297-110 to introduce safe access zones, commonly known as 'buffer zones' around clinics, to stop women seeking abortion care from being harassed by protesters.
In 2019, Northern Ireland's abortion laws were also modernised, with terminations allowed up to 12 weeks, and later under limited circumstances.
In a referendum in 2018, Ireland had also made abortion legal on request up to 12 weeks, and later if the foetus would be likely to die before or shortly after birth or if there is a risk of death or serious harm to a pregnant woman.
In both Northern Ireland and Ireland, the culpability for a termination carried out outside legal time frames lies with anyone who assists a woman procure an abortion, rather than the woman herself. Both countries had also previously had some of the strictest abortion laws in the world, with terminations banned in almost all circumstances.
In other parts of the world, change is moving in the opposite direction. In June 2022, the United States supreme court overturned the decision of Roe v Wade, and ruled there was no constitutional right to abortion. Laws are instead now decided state by state, with 19 of them either banning abortion or restricting access.
Parliament's latest vote is unlikely be the last on the subject. Medics, lawyers, politicians and campaigners recognise that the 1967 act is in need of reform.
Work to establish what a new framework should look like has already begun, but as Louise McCudden, UK head of external affairs at MSI Reproductive Choices, a reproductive health NGO, said: 'Getting abortion law reform right will take time, and we want to make sure we do that in a way that takes into account expert opinion, takes into account women's voices [and] human rights groups.'
But, McCudden said: 'The women who are being investigated and facing prosecution and jail can't afford to wait.' And parliament's latest vote means that now there will be no more Carla Fosters, or Nicola Packers.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
an hour ago
- Boston Globe
Keep your shoes on
Get The Gavel A weekly SCOTUS explainer newsletter by columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr. Enter Email Sign Up Why the TSA waited five years after Reid's abortive shoe bombing to institute its shoes-off rule has never been clearly explained, but in all that time no one else has tried to take down a plane using explosive footwear. Nor have any passengers ever been caught with a shoe bomb in the nearly two decades after the rule went into effect. Advertisement In other words, there has never been any evidence that making millions of travelers shed their shoes contributed to anyone's safety. It was all things rather than bad people — with screening for forbidden bottles of shampoo or corkscrews or lighters as if they posed deadly threats, instead of monitoring for behavior that represents a real threat to planes and their passengers. Advertisement From the day it was created, the TSA has specialized in fighting the last war and in overreacting to one-time long shots. One Islamist radical tried to hide explosives in his shoes, so hundreds of millions of travelers had to start removing their shoes. Another would-be terrorist, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, attempted to hide a bomb in his underwear, so we all had to submit to full-body scans or (for several years) pat-downs. British officials learned of a plot to I often reflected in the years after 9/11 that if Osama bin Laden's terrorists had destroyed not four airliners on that terrible day but four crowded movie theaters, then Americans would have had to radically change the way they went to the movies — advance reservations would have become mandatory, audiences would have had to get to the cineplex (with photo ID) two hours early, and X-ray equipment operated by a vast new federal bureaucracy, the Theater Security Administration, would have scanned everyone entering and leaving. But at airports there would be no interminable security lines, a box cutter in your carry-on wouldn't raise any eyebrows, and you could arrive for your flight 20 minutes before departure. We would still be as vulnerable to a hijacking-massacre as we actually were on 9/11 — but almost no one would be thinking about that because the 'last war' would have taken a different form. Advertisement Former TSA administrator And even that they aren't very good at. The government's own 'red team' tests — in which undercover inspectors try to smuggle weapons or contraband through security — have As Americans who travel abroad are aware, other countries never deemed it necessary to adopt the shoes-off rule. That includes countries in which the threat of terrorism is far more acute. In Israel, for example, security screening begins even before passengers enter the terminal, officials make a point of engaging in dialogue with almost everyone who's catching a plane, and travelers remain with their luggage until after the security check is completed. But nobody has to take their shoes off or remove their laptop from their bag to be scanned separately. Security agents there are watching for nervousness, inconsistencies, or suspicious behavior. They aren't preoccupied with confiscating bottled water or whether you're wearing a belt. Advertisement The TSA's ritualized absurdities have come at a steep cost. They waste billions of dollars annually. They consume countless hours of passengers' time. They treat everyone like a potential terrorist. To prove that no one is exempt, they have gone to the extreme of patting down Nearly a quarter-century after 9/11, there is no evidence that any of this has ever prevented a hijacking. 'TSA has played next to no role in the biggest counterterrorism stories of the past two decades,' journalist Darryl Campbell, who writes extensively about air travel and airline security, wrote in 2022. It is widely agreed that the two most effective deterrents to another hijacking have nothing to do with airport checkpoints. One was a physical change: the locking and reinforcing of cockpit doors, so that no terrorist could ever again breach the cockpit during flight. The other was psychological. The passengers on 9/11's United Flight 93, by overpowering the terrorists and forcing them to crash the plane into a field, prevented a far greater catastrophe that day — and thereby taught future travelers of the importance of fighting back. Advertisement The end of the shoes-off rule is long overdue. But it's just one small retreat in a long war of make-believe. The TSA remains fixated on creating the illusion of security rather than actually providing it. If the agency truly wants to protect travelers, it should abandon its theater of confiscated water bottles and trampled dignity and learn to focus instead on what truly keeps passengers safe. But until that happens, we can at least keep our shoes on. It's a start. Jeff Jacoby can be reached at
USA Today
9 hours ago
- USA Today
Trump rips 'so-called' friends' attacks on Bondi, tells MAGA to move on from Epstein
WASHINGTON – President Donald Trump threw his full support behind Attorney General Pam Bondi in a furious social media post that lit into his "so-called 'friends'" in MAGA and told them to move on from fevered demands that she release court files related to disgraced financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. "They're all going after Attorney General Pam Bondi, who is doing a FANTASTIC JOB! We're on one Team, MAGA, and I don't like what's happening. We have a PERFECT Administration, THE TALK OF THE WORLD, and 'selfish people' are trying to hurt it, all over a guy who never dies, Jeffrey Epstein," Trump wrote on July 12 in a lengthy post on Truth Social. Trump loyalists have been berating Bondi incessantly since the Justice Department and FBI said this week that a "systematic review" of documents related to Epstein "revealed no incriminating 'client list.'" Bondi said earlier this year that the documents were "sitting on my desk right now to review" and promised that "everything's going to come out to the public." Defending her stance at a July 8 Cabinet meeting at the White House, Bondi told reporters: "I was asked a question about the client list and my response was, 'It's sitting on my desk to be reviewed,' meaning the file, not the client list." Trump took another tack. In his statement on social media this weekend, he alleged that the government documents could have been written by political opponents and critics such as former President Barack Obama and former FBI director James Comey, whom he fired during his first term. Epstein timeline: Trump's team promised transparency on Epstein. Here's what they delivered. "They created the Epstein Files, just like they created the FAKE Hillary Clinton/Christopher Steele Dossier that they used on me, and now my so-called 'friends' are playing right into their hands," Trump wrote. The dossier, assembled by former British spy Christopher Steele, contained salacious allegations about Trump, including alleged connections between the Republican's 2016 presidential campaign and Russia. Trump also argued in his post that current FBI Director Kash Patel "must be focused on investigating" allegations of voter fraud and other red meat issues for the base. "LET PAM BONDI DO HER JOB – SHE'S GREAT!" he said. He told his supporters not to "waste Time and Energy on Jeffrey Epstein, somebody that nobody cares about." Contributing: Aysha Bagchi
Hamilton Spectator
14 hours ago
- Hamilton Spectator
More than 40 arrested at London protest in support of banned group Palestine Action
LONDON (AP) — More than 40 people were arrested Saturday at a protest in central London against the Palestine Action group being proscribed a terrorist organization by the government following a break-in and vandalism at a Royal Air Force base. The Metropolitan Police said 42 people had been arrested by late afternoon. All but one of the arrests were for showing support for a proscribed organization, which police have said includes chanting, wearing clothing or displaying articles such as flags, signs or logos. Another person was arrested for common assault. It was the second straight week protesters gathered to support the pro-Palestinian activist group. Its outlawing has meant support for the organization is deemed a criminal offense. Police arrested 29 people at a similar protest last weekend. Two groups gathered underneath both the statues of Indian independence leader Mahatma Gandhi and South Africa's first postapartheid president, Nelson Mandela, in Parliament Square. Signs with the wording 'I oppose genocide, I support Palestine Action,' were held aloft in silence as the protesters were surrounded by police officers and members of the media. Some demonstrators could be seen lying on top of each other on the ground as police searched their bags and took away signs. Officers could then be seen carrying away a number of protesters who were lying down, lifting them off the ground and into waiting police vans parked around the square. Other demonstrations were also planned across the U.K. on Saturday, including in Manchester, Cardiff and Londonderry, Northern Ireland. The official designation earlier this month of Palestine Action as a proscribed group under the Terrorism Act 2000 means that membership in the group and support for its actions are punishable by up to 14 years in prison. Some 81 organizations are already proscribed under the U.K. act, including the militant groups Hamas and al-Qaida. The government moved to ban Palestine Action after activists broke into a Royal Air Force base in Brize Norton in Oxfordshire, England, on June 20, damaging two planes using red paint and crowbars in protest at the British government's ongoing military support for Israel in its war in Gaza . Police said that the incident caused around 7 million pounds' ($9.4 million) worth of damage. Four people between 22 and 35 years old were charged with conspiracy to commit criminal damage and conspiracy to enter a prohibited place for purposes prejudicial to the interests of the U.K. The four are scheduled to appear on July 18 at the Central Criminal Court. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
