Oppose expanding Scotland’s abortion law, including proposals to allow abortions on social grounds right up to birth

Oppose any attempts to expand Scotland’s abortion laws, including proposals to scrap the 24-week time limit and allow abortions on social grounds, including for sex-selective purposes, right up to birth.

A review of abortion law in Scotland commissioned by the Scottish Government, and undertaken by a group chaired by a former trustee of the UK’s largest abortion provider, has recommended that Scotland scrap the 24-week time limit and allow abortions on social grounds, including for sex-selective purposes, right up to birth.

There is currently a 24-week limit on section (1)(1)(a), which means that abortions for social reasons cannot happen after 24 weeks.

The report recommends that this 24-week limit be scrapped, and social abortions be allowed right through to birth – the language the report proposes is used for abortions post-24 weeks is similar to (in fact weaker than) the current grounds for abortion up to 24 weeks, which are interpreted as to allow abortions on merely social grounds.

Between 24 weeks and birth, the report proposes that two healthcare professionals (this is not limited to doctors, it could include nurses, midwives or others unspecified by the report) would decide if an abortion was “appropriate” (page 9).

The subjective definition of “appropriate” includes considering a woman’s current or even future “psychological and social circumstances.” (page 9, point 5.2.C).

The inclusion of social circumstances means that pro-abortion healthcare professionals could approve abortions at full term on purely social grounds – and they would not have to document them. Similarly, the inclusion of “psychological” circumstances is very similar to the current mental health grounds in the Abortion Act, currently restricted to before 24 weeks, which is interpreted by abortion providers to allow abortion on demand.

Unborn babies could legally have their lives ended by an abortion throughout all nine months of pregnancy – right up to when they are about to be born.

The report also recommends a number of other changes be made to abortion provision in Scotland.

The proposed changes go far beyond the already extreme current proposals in England and Wales, which would only amend the law for women performing their own abortions.

This would leave Scotland with one of the most extreme abortion laws in the world.

The change would position Scotland drastically away from the European Union, where the most common abortion time limit among EU countries is 12 weeks.

The proposed law change would also likely lead to an increased number of viable babies’ lives being ended well beyond the 24-week abortion time limit and beyond the point at which they would be able to survive outside the womb.

There will be pressure from the abortion lobby for these extreme proposals to become law following the Scottish Parliament election on 7 May.

Instead of making extreme changes to abortion legislation in Scotland, MSPs should come together to introduce policy changes that increase protections for babies in the womb and stop pregnancy discrimination for women and unsafe home abortion schemes – policies that will save lives by protecting and supporting both mother and child.

Independent polling undertaken by SavantaComRes shows that only 1% of women support abortion being available up to birth.

End discrimination against baby girls and lower the abortion time limit

Stop discrimination against baby girls by supporting a law change to clarify that sex-selective abortion is illegal in Scotland, and bring Scottish law closer to the laws in the majority of EU member states by supporting a law change to lower the gestational time limit for abortion. 

Stop discrimination against baby girls

Globally, well over 100 million women are estimated to be missing from populations because of sex-selective abortion (the practice of terminating a pregnancy based on the predicted sex of the baby). Women can come under intense pressure from families, husbands, boyfriends and other third parties to terminate a pregnancy, usually when a baby girl is expected.

In the United Kingdom, a lack of clarity in current legislation has been exploited to allow abortions to be provided on the basis of the baby’s sex. The British Medical Association (BMA) has outlined cases where it believes sex-selective abortion is permissible on mental health grounds, and the UK’s largest abortion provider, the British Pregnancy Advisory Service (BPAS), also claims that abortion for gender is not illegal.

A BBC investigation revealed that Non-Invasive Pre-Natal Tests (NIPT) are being used widely to determine the gender of babies, with women disclosing that they were under intense pressure to undergo sex-selective abortions. There is also a body of first-hand testimony from UK-resident women who say that they have come under intense pressure from family members to have sex-selective abortions and have gone on to obtain these abortions in the UK.

Notably, a report from the Nuffield Council on Bioethics, a government advisory body, found a number of websites offering baby gender tests for around £170. In that report, the Council warned that the increasingly widespread use of the tests in the UK could lead to the country becoming a haven for sex-selective abortions.

An investigation by the Telegraph revealed that doctors were agreeing to provide sex-selective abortions ‘no questions asked.’

Lower the abortion time limit

Scotland’s current 24-week abortion limit is past the point at which many babies now survive, is double that of the most common time limit among European Union countries and represents a contradiction at the heart of our abortion law.

Originally set at 28 weeks, the abortion limit was lowered in 1990 to 24 weeks gestation in reflection of medical and technological advances that had resulted in improving survival rates for babies born before 28 weeks gestation.

Since then, however, further medical advances have meant that babies born below 24 weeks gestation are increasingly able to survive.

This leaves a clear contradiction at the heart of our abortion law and current medical practice.

On the one hand, the law permits ending the lives of babies at 22 and 23 weeks, and, on the other hand, current medical practice strives to save the lives of many babies born prematurely at 22 or 23 weeks gestation.

This means in the same hospital, on the same day, two babies at the same gestational age (22 or 23 weeks gestation) could have very different fates – one could have his or her life deliberately ended by abortion, and the other could be born prematurely and have a dedicated medical team provide the best care they can to try to save his or her life.

Bringing Scottish law closer to the laws in the majority of EU member states by lowering the gestational time limit for abortion will bring us in line with modern science and is well supported by the public.

Independent polling undertaken by SavantaComRes shows that 89% of the general population and 91% of women agree that gender-selective abortion should be explicitly banned by the law.

Independent polling from SavantaComRes shows that 70% of women want to see the time limit for abortion reduced to 20 weeks or below.

Stop pregnancy discrimination and unsafe home abortion schemes

Support women in the workplace by backing policies designed to end pregnancy discrimination and stop women’s safety being put at risk, by reinstating in-person consultations with a medical professional before abortion pills can be prescribed.

Stop pregnancy discrimination

The Equality Act 2010 was supposed to stop discrimination in the workplace, but evidence has emerged that pregnant women and mothers still face high levels of discrimination.

Findings from interviews conducted with over 3,000 employers and over 3,000 mothers show that an alarming 77% of mothers report having “a negative or possibly discriminatory experience during pregnancy, maternity leave, or on return from maternity leave”. More specifically, half of mothers reported “a negative impact on their opportunity, status or job security”, and 20% reported “financial loss” as a result of their pregnancy.

While a majority of employers believe “it was in their interests to support pregnant women’’, and “that statutory rights relating to pregnancy…[are] reasonable and easy to facilitate”, the summary of key findings outlined several other concerning statistics, including:

• Approximately 1 in 9 mothers stated “they felt forced to leave their job. This included those being dismissed (1%); made compulsorily redundant, where others in their workplace were not (1%); or feeling treated so poorly they felt they had to leave their job (9%)”.
• 1 in 5 mothers reported “harassment or negative comments related to pregnancy or flexible working from their employer/colleagues” and
• 1 in 10 mothers said they “were discouraged from attending antenatal appointments”.

Notably, single and ethnic minority mothers were both “more likely to report financial loss” and “a negative impact on opportunity”.

Experiencing pregnancy and maternity discrimination could result in a scenario where women have to pick between being discriminated against but being financially secure, or leaving their job and struggling financially. No woman should have to make this choice.

Reinstate in-person consultations with a medical professional before abortion pills can be prescribed

Since home abortions have been allowed, as has been reported extensively in the media, a number of significant safety and safeguarding problems have put the lives and health of many women in danger (details of these significant problems are available here).

In June 2023, Carla Foster was jailed for taking abortion pills sent by BPAS, Britain’s largest abortion provider, when she was 32-34 weeks gestation but claimed to be seven weeks pregnant.

She later described being traumatised by seeing the face of her dead baby, whom she named Lily.

If Carla Foster had been given an in-person consultation with a medical professional, where the gestation of baby Lily could have been accurately determined, before being sent abortion pills, she would not have been able to get the abortion pills and this tragic case would likely have been prevented.

Baby Lily would likely be here today and Carla Foster’s life would not have been put at risk by performing a late-term abortion at home.

The reinstatement of in-person consultations with a medical professional prior to an abortion taking place at home would help protect women from the health risks involved with performing a late-term abortion at home, along with identifying many other health risks that can be accurately assessed with an in-person consultation.

It would also protect babies from having their lives ended in late-term home abortions, as baby Lily did.

At the consultation, medical professionals would have the opportunity to accurately assess, in person, any likely health risks for a woman taking abortion pills, her gestational age and the possibility of a coerced abortion.

Independent polling from Savanta ComRes shows that 79% of the general population and 84% of women agree that women who want to continue with their pregnancies, but are under financial pressure to have an abortion, should be given more support. Stopping pregnancy and maternity discrimination would help provide many women across the country with the financial support they need to care for their children and themselves.

Independent polling from Whitestone Insight shows that two-thirds of women support the reinstatement of in-person appointments and only 4% in favour of the status quo.