Skip to main content

Changing abortion limits in the UK

Abortion has been one of the main topics in British politics this week, as various members of the British government, in particular Health Minister Jeremy Hunt, have come out with different proposals or 'personal' statements that they'd like to see the time limit for legal abortions, since 1967 set at 24 weeks, lowered.

Technically, abortion in the UK is generally prohibited and a woman is able to obtain an abortion only if one of several exceptions is met. In practice, however, the exceptions seem to have swallowed the general prohibition and access to abortion appears to be much easier than it is, generally, than in the United States.

Politically, one of the main differences between the United States and the UK is that no major party in the UK officially supports a restrictive pro-life position (like the American Republican Party). The reaction to Mr. Hunt's (and other's) opinions bears this out.

Mr. Hunt, who stated that he'd like the time limit lowered to 12 weeks, tried to make clear he was expressing a personal view but that seemed to be brushed aside by the media and women's rights groups, given his position as Health Minister. Prime Minister David Cameron seemed to regard discussing abortion as a potentially explosive distraction from more pressing business; he firmly stated that the 24-week limit would not be reexamined officially. Other Conservative party members and luminaries seemed similarly peeved at Mr. Hunt.

At the same time, PM Cameron and the home secretary, Theresa May, have suggested that they would be comfortable with the abortion limit being lowered to 20 weeks. This is presumably because scientific advances have lowered the outer range of viability below 24 weeks. This has been a subject of legislation in many American states (although in the U.S. the limit on late abortions is a floating standard pegged to the viability of each individual fetus, so it should not be an issue-- note also that the Supreme Court rejects firm time limits under Roe).

Another curiosity of Mr. Hunt's statement, from the American standpoint, was his pointing out that his view on reducing the abortion limit to 12 weeks was not "for religious reasons." In the United States, it would be highly odd for a pro-life legislator to discount religion as the motivation for his or her views. In fact, this would be a kind of point of pride. It is certainly a different political context where an elected official thinks it important to disavow religious motivation.

Links:

Article in The Guardian (October 6, 2012): Jeremy Hunt attacked from all sides after abortion comments

Washington Post article on Jeremy Hunt's proposal (October 6, 2012): UK health secretary backs reducing abortion limit to 12 weeks, sparking debate, criticism

BBC News summary of abortion law in the UK (October 6, 2012): Q&A: Abortion Law

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The irony of the inquiry into Dr. Halappanavar's death

The Associated Press (via  The Washington Post ) reports that the composition of the panel that is investigating Dr. Savita Halappanavar's death in Ireland has changed: Prime Minister Enda Kenny told lawmakers he hoped the move — barely 24 hours after Ireland unveiled the seven-member panel — would allow the woman’s widower to support the probe into why Savita Halappanavar, a 31-year-old Indian dentist, died Oct. 28 while hospitalized in Galway.   Kenny’s U-turn came hours after her husband, Praveen Halappanavar, said he would refuse to talk to the investigators and would not consent to their viewing his wife’s medical records because three of the Galway hospital’s senior doctors had been appointed as investigators. Kenny said that the three doctors would be replaced by other officials “who have no connection at all with University Hospital Galway. In that sense the investigation will be completely and utterly independent.”   This makes sense. Why conduct an inquiry at all

Breast-feeding as an abortifacient?

I came across this citation while reading a William  Saletan column, which, if I can decipher the jargon, indicates that ovulation may still occur during the postpartum breast-feeding stage. Does this suggest that, during this stage, a woman may have a fertilized egg that does not implant due to breast-feeding? This would place breast-feeding as an abortifacient practice in line with other methods of contraceptive unacceptable to pro-lifers. Saletan's earlier column does a nice job of capturing the scientific uncertainty over what happens with eggs and implantation with emergency contraception (like Plan B).