Police could search women's homes and phones after pregnancy loss

But that’s an argument to decriminalise everything?

There isn’t much evidence that criminalising anything stops it from happening…… you can argue that about drugs, stealing etc so should we just make nothing illegal because it doesn’t actually stop or deter anything, so we should just as accept it as a society then and never impose a moral code that says no you should not do that

It just sounds sinister. Even if it was intended to protect women which I find dubious, the result will be to harass and victimise them.

Women won't, though. Increasing the use of criminal prosecution will make women in difficult situations less likely to go and see a doctor as doing so will make her more vulnerable to police involvement down the line.

Studies show that criminal sanctions for abortion don't reduce numbers and do increase negative health outcomes. This is the case whether she ends up aborting or not. So it puts the fetuses of women who are unsure but don't abort at risk as well as the women and their families who are investigated when they did not break the law.

And it is an easy law for bad actors to abuse.

The guidelines pretty clearly focus suspicion primarily on the mother or HCPs (depending on the type of loss they're referring to). The possibility of third parties exerting control is only mentioned in passing. This is not a document aimed at protecting vulnerable women.

The headline does not misrepresent the facts except in that it says "could" instead of "can". These aren't new police powers the guidelines suggest using. It's just a change in emphasis that threatens increased risk of a criminal investigation for innocent women who have gone through a harrowing time. All for no social benefit, because we already know that criminal penalties for abortion do not effectively reduce the number that happen.

I've recommended it before and am doing so again, but Unborn by Rachel McLean is a "dystopian" novel which seems more and more like a prediction.

The idea of this somehow helping trafficked or abused women doesn't make sense to me. Finding an illegal abortion doesn't help to prove that a woman was trafficked or abused. Instead even if the police do manage to prove she was trafficked, she still has to prove that she didn't consent to the termination otherwise she's a criminal just as much as the traffickers. And we already know how hard it is to prove lack of consent. This kind of investigation will just makes it that much harder for a pregnant abused or trafficked woman to seek help and escape. Sure, it may occasionally lead the police to a convict a trafficker if all goes well and they're very lucky but the possibility of investigation works against women and in favour of trafickers and abusers.

Several reasons, one being because if you pass the baby but not the placenta (retained placenta is much more common during abortions, miscarriages and premature births than births at term) it's a medical emergency because you can start hemorrhaging. You don't want to be alone at home in that scenario.

Thankyou for explaining I was confused thinking if they work then why are they only for less than 9 weeks

Because they work by making you expel the pregnancy. So if you take them later there is far more risk that you either don’t fully expel the foetus and uterine lining due to its size leaving the woman at risk of infection and possible sepsis or because when you get nearer the 24 plus week, you will essentially give birth to a live baby that then dies because it can’t breathe

It does make me think though - why are they only legally used for under 9 w gestation abortion if they actually do work for later ? Surely it’s a less invasive process to take tablets

And do you not think that in the interest of a foetus that may be expelled alive because she’s “assuming she’s early” - it should be the case that if there is any doubt, women ought to be expected to ….i don’t know …. go to the free doctors appointment and go to the free hospital for scan before they take a pill that might expel a live foetus

I am sure there are the occasional cases. But is it 2 a week?

So you honestly think no women ever thinks they’ll try an abortion pill as a means to end a pregnancy knowing full well they are over legal limit for an abortion? Or are of the all expectant mothers are angels schools of thought? I think it’s extremely rare …. As in fact murder is extremely rare. But we have laws to protect us from the extremely rare which is what this law does. And it’s not surprising that, given the recent case where a woman was apparently unaware she was 25 + weeks pregnant and aborted her foetus, the guidance on this is clarified and updated. She was found not guilty and regardless of whether I agree or not with that verdict; I believe in the law (although I don’t believe it is infallible) but I’d rather have it than not.

To be fair, I think history has shown that if abortion isn't available, women will use whatever methods they need to, despite sometimes high risks to their own lives. So while it's going to be fairly rare in the UK where abortion is fairly accessible pre-24 weeks, there are likely to be a few cases where it happens.

I think criminal law, especially the draconian law we currently have, is totally the wrong way to treat women who do. But I won't deny the idea that it will happen, as avoiding forced pregnancy will drive some women to take significant risk.

Edited to add the point I intended to make!:
The issue is that by criminalising we create a society in which women's fertility can (and is) be used against them, whether they have illegal abortions or not.

Do you honestly think any woman who genuinely knows she is over 24 weeks pregnant would choose to take abortion tablets and deliver a stillborn baby at home by herself, risking her own life and a jail sentence too? And on the very small chance that she DID know and took that risk anyway, do you not consider it more likely that she was motivated by abuse, coercion, extreme distress or fear rather than a cruel desire to ‘kill her baby’?

Think of how many women have babies every year having had no idea they were pregnant as they were still having what they believed to be periods. If one of those women finds out she’s pregnant but assumes it’s early as she’s only missed one period, should she go to prison if she was wrong?

I agree. As someone who has had an abortion and lost a pregnancy.

The change during covid means anyone can get abortion pills without seeing a doctor.

I don't believe abortion should be completely decriminalised, because I don't see the moral difference between using abortion pills at 24 weeks and giving birth prematurely at 24 weeks and then killing the baby. The pills themselves won't actually necessarily kill a foetus at 24 weeks; that's why later medical abortions require an injection to stop the heart first.

“The boundaries of decency” for most people is not to kill late term babies. Most people find the “as soon as possible as late as possible necessary” mantra of the radical feminist pretty indecent and abhorrent actually. Poll after poll shows most people don’t want the limit lifted. It’s the absolutist attitude that is driving women away from “feminism” in droves.

I don’t want women to have carte blanch to abort viable babies after 24 weeks. I actually think 24 weeks is pretty generous given survival rates for babies born at 24 weeks is now between 60 and 80% depending on which study you believe and there are exceptions available to go beyond this.

I think abortion is a necessary thing to have but I want the law around it ri be upheld like I want any law to be upheld.

I think the far more scary thing quite frankly is the radical feminist movement to absolve women responsibility for anything ….. we are being infantilised by this movement that says that we are never accountable for our actions.

Indeed. This article last year was very informative.

‘Extreme’ US anti-abortion group ramps up lobbying in Westminster
The UK branch of the Alliance Defending Freedom has increased its spending and is forging ties with key MPs
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/apr/06/extreme-us-anti-abortion-group-ramps-up-lobbying-in-westminster

The scheduled vote on decriminalising abortion mentioned in that article never happened because Sunak called an General Election, but this was what was proposed then:

MPs to get free vote on decriminalising abortion in England and Wales
Amendment by Labour MP Diana Johnson would end prosecutions for terminations after 24 weeks
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/feb/23/mps-to-get-free-vote-on-decriminalising-abortion-in-england-and-wales

'Do they have some guidelines about number of weeks pregnant that someone has a still birth it should be investigated or any still birth'

This bit, I mean.

All in the guidelines I linked to upthread.

I'll be watching this proposed amendment to the Crime and Policing Bill with interest.

Abortion decriminalisation plans pushed by Labour MP
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c9dqp3dep48o

It's had some cross-party support.

US religious anti-choice / forced birth groups are increasingly funding UK ‘right to life’ groups, who are in turn increasing their rhetoric and harassment techniques.

Until the last general election, there were several MPs who were part of an anti abortion APPG whose members also included prominent US-funded religious extremist groups. Some of those MPs have been paid to speak at their fundraising events and actively campaign for reducing abortion term limits to be in more in line with Europe (12-14 weeks).

Prosecutions of women under the OATP Act are at the highest levels in 100 years.

If you’ve not been paying attention to what’s going on right here in the UK, you might think it’s only the US that is going more right wing on women’s reproductive rights. But you would be wrong. Decriminalisation needs to happen NOW.

Reminded me of this (posted last year)