UK Parliament votes to end ‘cruel' abortion prosecutions for women
Another case involved Nicola Packer, who was charged after taking the medications mifepristone and misoprostol at about 26 weeks of pregnancy. She denied knowing that she was more than 10 weeks pregnant and was acquitted by a jury.
The reform does not extend to medical professionals or anyone else involved in abortions performed outside existing legal frameworks. Nor does it alter the clinical requirements of the 1967 Act, which permits abortions up to 24 weeks with authorisation from two doctors, and after that point only under limited and exceptional circumstances.
Not all within the government backed the change. Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood opposed the amendment, warning of risks it might introduce.
'I am deeply concerned to see these measures being progressed in the name of women's rights, when the potential physical and mental impacts on women would be so devastating,' she wrote to constituents.
'I oppose extending abortions up until the point of birth beyond the exemptions that currently exist, as doing so would not only be unnecessary but dangerous.'
Antoniazzi made clear the measure would not affect healthcare provisions: the clause 'would not change any law regarding the provision of abortion services within a healthcare setting', she said, reiterating that the current time limits and clinical conditions would remain.
The UK vote lands at a moment of flux in abortion access across Europe, where legal protections are often undermined by logistical or cultural barriers.
Despite most EU countries allowing abortion under certain conditions, many women — an estimated 4500 in 2022 — still travel abroad to access care.
Loading
The Netherlands received 2762 women from Germany, Poland, Belgium, France, and Ireland in 2022 alone. Spain recorded about 1500 cross-border abortion cases in the same year. Hundreds more travelled to the UK for the same reason.
Notably, only two EU member states – Malta and Poland – impose near-total bans. But restrictive time limits, a lack of providers and religious or cultural resistance elsewhere mean that abortion, while legal on paper, is inaccessible in practice.
Women in France, Italy, and Croatia, for example, often struggle to access care due to 'conscientious objectors' – doctors who refuse to perform abortions. In some Italian regions, up to 90 per cent of physicians decline to carry out the procedure. Even in France, one-third of the UK-based Abortion Support Network's clients are French, many from rural areas without clinics.
A recent survey found the average delay between discovering a pregnancy and accessing an abortion was four weeks – often because of waiting periods, lack of information, or difficulty in securing funds and time off work.
A citizen-led initiative titled My Voice, My Choice has gathered more than a million signatures calling on the EU to fund abortion access across borders.
But progress has been slow. The EU's health commissioner said the bloc 'stands ready to support member states,' but reiterated that abortion remains a matter of national jurisdiction.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sky News AU
33 minutes ago
- Sky News AU
'How long is it going to take?' Demoted Labor backbencher Ed Husic grills Anthony Albanese on Labor recognising Palestinian state
A Labor backbencher has questioned Prime Minister Anthony Albanese's timeline for recognising Palestinian statehood during a meeting of the caucus in Canberra. Sky News understands Ed Husic, who was dumped from the ministry shortly after the election, took to his feet during Labor's caucus meeting on Tuesday morning to ask the Prime Minister 'how long is it going to take?' to formally recognise a Palestinian state. Raising the matter in the caucus room indicates rising internal pressure on the Albanese government to consider fast-tracking Palestinian recognition, rather than waiting until later in the peace process. In response to Mr Husic's question, Mr Albanese referred the caucus to his comments in Question Time on Monday, in which he noted 'recognition of a Palestinian state by Australia might occur before the finalisation of a peace process'. The Prime Minister told caucus there needs to be 'democratisation' in Gaza, also referencing the 'abominable actions' of Hamas. He cited a quote often attributed to Nelson Mandela, noting that 'things may seem impossible until they happen'. About 147 countries already recognise Palestinian independence. Later this year, French President Emmanuel Macron will use a speech at the United Nations to recognise a Palestinian state. Since his demotion to the backbench, Mr Husic has indicated he will continue to speak publicly about Palestinian statehood. Speaking to Sky News on Monday, Mr Husic argued recognition cannot wait any longer. 'I understand the logic that's been expressed by our government that said it should be part of a process, but the reality is that events have changed,' the former Industry Minister told Newsday. 'We should be making that case and saying we are prepared to recognise that now'. Also in response to Mr Husic's question, Mr Albanese told caucus Israel's claims that starvation is not occurring in Gaza, telling caucus such suggestions are 'beyond comprehension'. Earlier, US President Donald Trump told reporters on a visit to Scotland that there is 'real starvation' taking place in Gaza. On Monday night, Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu shared a video on social media platform X (formerly Twitter), claiming 'there is no starvation in Gaza, no policy of starvation in Gaza, and I assure you that we have a commitment to achieve our war goals'. Israel's Deputy Ambassador to Australia, Amir Meron, also claimed there is no starvation in Gaza during a briefing with journalists. Caucus meetings provide backbenchers an opportunity to ask questions of senior ministers on whatever subject they choose.
ABC News
37 minutes ago
- ABC News
Threat or a thought bubble, Trump's new tariff idea spells trouble for Australia
It could be a throw-away line or a massive blow to the Australian economy delivered by US President Donald Trump. Australia thought it was relatively safe from Trump's tariff war. It turns out we could have been wrong. Once again, the US president seemed to be confirming a shift in his trade policy as an aside in a larger press conference. Trump loves to boast about his freewheeling speaking style — his so-called "weave," where he jumps from topic to topic in a way that might make someone think he's lost his train of thought, though he insists it's always clear in the end. He was holding court at his Turnberry Golf Course in Scotland. He was visiting a foreign country — the UK — but it was him playing host to British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and setting the terms of the interaction. There were plenty of awkward moments for Sir Keir, who had to politely listen to Trump rail against the scourge of wind farms, which he claimed were ruining the views from his golf course, and how damaging he believed illegal immigration had been to Britain. But the hardest part for the Australian prime minister to hear was likely when Trump began talking about the next stage of his one-man tariff offensive against the world. Fresh off claiming an agreement had been reached with the European Union — although details remain elusive — Trump acknowledged that doing individual trade deals with other countries was quite time-consuming. Who would've thought? Once again, he remarked with seemingly genuine shock at how many countries exist in the world: "You have 200 countries — more. People don't get that." Even though he'd previously boasted that countries were desperate to do deals with him, he now seemed resigned to the fact that he couldn't get them individually ticked off. So, he has a more efficient idea: "We're going to be setting a tariff for essentially the rest of the world. And that's what they're going to pay if they want to do business in the United States. Because you can't sit down and make 200 deals." Sound familiar? Back in April, during his "Liberation Day" announcement, Trump said almost all countries would be hit with a 10 per cent "baseline" tariff. Many were also slapped with higher "reciprocal" rates, though most of those were subsequently put on hold. They're due to come into effect this week for countries that haven't struck deals with the US. Australia only received the baseline rate, largely because it buys more from the US than it sells. But Trump clearly doesn't think that baseline rate cuts it anymore. He said it would likely be lifted to "somewhere in the 15 to 20 per cent range", an idea he had first floated during a phone interview with NBC earlier this month. If this comes to pass — and it's a big "if", given Trump's tendency to announce policy one day and backtrack the next — it would be a massive economic blow to Australian businesses that export to the US. While the current 10 per cent impost makes Australian products more expensive for US consumers and less competitive relative to American goods, it was thought to give Australian businesses a leg up compared to countries hit with reciprocal tariffs. It had looked like 10 per cent was the floor rate, and no other country would receive a more favourable arrangement. It also gave Australia little incentive to negotiate a better deal with the US, since the Trump administration didn't seem willing to go lower than 10 per cent or drop it entirely. But if Trump now imposes a 20 per cent baseline tariff, Australia will be disadvantaged compared to countries that have already struck better deals — or at least "frameworks" of deals. The UK, Japan, and now the EU have all said they've secured deals where their exports to the US are hit with a 15 per cent duty. So, from being the least badly treated friend, Australia might now be getting worse treatment than many large economies. It would also seem, on face value, to be clearly unfair, even based on Trump's own questionable tariff logic. Australia had a lower rate because the administration said it was allowing better access for US goods. But now it may well face a higher tariff than the EU, which Trump has previously bashed as one of the most egregious blockers of American trade ambitions. Six months into his second term, it's difficult to know when Trump is clearly stating a new policy or just thinking out loud in front of the world's media. But his words seem pretty clear on this occasion: he's planning to raise the baseline tariff, and that's going to hurt Australian businesses. Trump's Commerce Secretary, Howard Lutnick, said last week that Trump wasn't planning to hike the baseline. But in the Trump administration, the only word that seems to matter is his. Perhaps it's a negotiating tactic, though countries only facing the baseline tariff weren't even sent the recent letters Trump fired off, imploring leaders to do a deal. Even if this is just a thought bubble, Australia's leaders will need to take it seriously — because when it comes to Trump, thought bubbles can be highly consequential.
Sydney Morning Herald
3 hours ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
Can the world trust Trump? This golf video might have the answer
London: Donald Trump has made some big claims over the past few days – on trade, the Epstein scandal, global conflict and more – but his tough talk could be drowned out by his dubious play on the golf course. A video of the American president near a sand trap on a Scottish fairway shows one of his caddies dropping a golf ball onto the grass in a convenient location for Trump to seemingly play his next shot. The move seemed to spare Trump from the harder work of getting his ball out of the bunker and onto the green. The caddy leaned down, dropped the ball behind him and walked on as if nothing had happened. Trump was able to climb out of his golf buggy and prepare to play a more favourable shot. Presidents cheat at golf. Bill Clinton was famous for it. But the video spread at the very moment Trump was engaged in big talk that raised a big question: can anyone rely on anything he says? A few days ago, Trump claimed his trade deal with Japan included a $US550 billion ($843 billion) investment fund to spend on American assets under his direction, but the Japanese later described it as an ambition rather than a binding promise. On Sunday, he announced a $US600 billion investment from Europe under a trade deal with the European Union, but EU officials admitted they could not direct companies to spend the money. It is highly likely they are rebadging funds that would be invested anyway. Then, on Monday, he said he wanted most countries to incur tariffs in the range of 15 to 20 per cent on their exports to America. This is in line with the Japanese and EU outcomes, which both applied a 15 per cent tariff on most of the products they ship to the US. But it is out of line with the rates he has imposed elsewhere – like 35 per cent on Canada, 30 per cent on Mexico and 50 per cent on Brazil. What does this mean for Australia? The signal is that it may incur tariffs of 15 to 20 per cent. Right now, Australian exports are subject to a baseline rate of 10 per cent, but the final rate is meant to be set by this Friday.
