Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Guest posts

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Guest Post

Guest Post: "If my amendment is passed, Nicola Packer will go down in history as the last woman in England and Wales to be prosecuted for an abortion"

233 replies

RhiannonEMumsnet · 02/06/2025 14:07

Tonia Antoniazzi MP

Tonia Antoniazzi is the Labour MP for Gower.

73% of Mumsnet users want abortion to be decriminalised which is why it was included in the GE2024 Mumsnet Manifesto - one of twelve policy asks for the new government, based on the experiences and opinions that millions of women have shared on site.

I agree.

Like many of you I’ve been horrified by the increasing number of women who’ve been arrested by police for suspected illegal abortion.

In the last five years, more than 100 women have been investigated under the ‘Offences Against the Person Act’ 1861. Eight of these women have appeared in court. One has been jailed. Among those arrested have been women who’ve suffered natural miscarriages and stillbirths, and others who have gone into unexplained premature labour.

It’s just wrong. It’s a waste of taxpayers’ money. It’s a waste of the judiciary’s time.

As the Mumsnet Manifesto said, it’s also not in the public interest to prosecute. We know that no woman ends her pregnancy out of malice – only out of desperation.

It was meeting Nicola Packer at her trial for alleged illegal abortion at Isleworth Crown Court in southwest London that strengthened my resolve to push for a change in the law. My colleague Tracy Gilbert MP and I spoke to her days before she was unanimously cleared by a jury.

Seeing Nicola in the dock, afraid and humiliated, my heart went out to her.

Nicola has been hugely traumatised by her prosecution – having maintained throughout her trial that she was unaware she was any more than 10 weeks’ pregnant. She has also spent the last four-and-a-half years waiting for her case to come to court, living in constant fear that she could go to jail.

To me it was obvious Nicola was not the suspect, but the victim. The victim of a Victorian-era law that criminalises women who end their own pregnancies.

That’s why, last month in Parliament, I tabled an amendment to the Crime and Policing Bill. A move that has the backing of more than 100 MPs and 50 organisations including Mumsnet, the British Medical Association and five medical Royal Colleges.

My amendment targets the draconian ‘Offences Against the Person Act’ of 1861. This law means abortion is still a criminal offence in England and Wales except under specific circumstances. If you try to end your own pregnancy at any gestation outside the law the maximum sentence is life in prison – the most severe penalty for an illegal abortion in the world.

In 2019 my colleagues in Westminster repealed this archaic law for Northern Ireland. My amendment will simply bring legislation up to date in England and Wales – and in line with 50 other places worldwide including Ireland, Canada, France, Australia and New Zealand.

My amendment will not, however, remove any important safeguards. The Abortion Act of 1967 will be unchanged. This means you can legally access an abortion provided you meet certain criteria: you are under 24 weeks’ pregnant, you meet one of seven medical reasons, and have your abortion signed off by two doctors. My amendment will not change any law regarding the provision of abortion services within a healthcare setting or the provision of telemedicine.

Parliament is expected to vote on the amendment in early summer. If it gets passed, all cases currently going through the criminal justice system will end. And Nicola Packer will go down in history as the last woman in England and Wales to be prosecuted for an abortion.

If you agree that abortion must be decriminalised, support my amendment by contacting your MP using this link: https://www.bpas.org/our-cause/campaigns/abortion-law-reform/

OP posts:
Thread gallery
6
Merrymouse · 18/06/2025 23:03

This is what I don’t understand.

Is Tonia’s argument that

  1. Sarah Catt should not have been prosecuted?

  2. She could still be prosecuted using different legislation?

or

  1. Although the guilty verdict was correct in this instance, and she would escape prosecution following the change in the law, cases like hers are so rare that it is worth changing the law to prevent Nicola Packet being prosecuted?
TENSsion · 19/06/2025 06:31

Merrymouse · 18/06/2025 23:03

This is what I don’t understand.

Is Tonia’s argument that

  1. Sarah Catt should not have been prosecuted?

  2. She could still be prosecuted using different legislation?

or

  1. Although the guilty verdict was correct in this instance, and she would escape prosecution following the change in the law, cases like hers are so rare that it is worth changing the law to prevent Nicola Packet being prosecuted?
Edited

Lord knows.
There are plenty of crimes that are vanishingly rare that I wouldn’t want to be decriminalised.

HeadbandUnited · 19/06/2025 09:11

OrangeSlices998 · 18/06/2025 18:03

That is an awful story to read. I am not out here campaigning for all women to abort their 32/34/36 weekers in an abortion free for all. Being pro choice is exactly that - wanting the freedom to choose for myself and for others.

That story is awful, it’s not easy to read and I’m sad for all involved. I can also find you hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of women whose abortion WAS healthcare who obtained it legally through an approved provider at an early gestation as the majority of abortions are.

I'm sure you think very fondly of your principled stance. But if your reaction to that case of utterly egregious harm to a full term baby is to approve of the woman's freedom to choose then you are not principled, you are a zealot.

I can also find you hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of women whose abortion WAS healthcare who obtained it legally

Why would you spend your time doing that? I have absolutely no problem with abortions obtained through the current legal framework, which appropriately balances the rights of women and healthy late term foetuses.

OpheliaWasntMad · 19/06/2025 10:50

HeadbandUnited · 19/06/2025 09:11

I'm sure you think very fondly of your principled stance. But if your reaction to that case of utterly egregious harm to a full term baby is to approve of the woman's freedom to choose then you are not principled, you are a zealot.

I can also find you hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of women whose abortion WAS healthcare who obtained it legally

Why would you spend your time doing that? I have absolutely no problem with abortions obtained through the current legal framework, which appropriately balances the rights of women and healthy late term foetuses.

Hear hear

OrangeSlices998 · 19/06/2025 16:45

HeadbandUnited · 19/06/2025 09:11

I'm sure you think very fondly of your principled stance. But if your reaction to that case of utterly egregious harm to a full term baby is to approve of the woman's freedom to choose then you are not principled, you are a zealot.

I can also find you hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of women whose abortion WAS healthcare who obtained it legally

Why would you spend your time doing that? I have absolutely no problem with abortions obtained through the current legal framework, which appropriately balances the rights of women and healthy late term foetuses.

Two thing can be true at the same time - women should have the right to choose AND that story is horrific.

RingoJuice · 19/06/2025 17:05

Why did she take abortion pills after 10 weeks? Why do you mail them instead of requiring people to confirm with a doctor prior to termination? You are relying on people to accurately report to medical authorities, I wouldn’t be confident of this, and you’ll have plenty more horror stories because you refuse to have them confirm the age of the fetus. Gross.

RingoJuice · 19/06/2025 17:08

OpheliaWasntMad · 17/06/2025 22:06

Im sorry to hear about your difficult pregnancies.
Im not arguing against late term ( over 24 weeks) abortion if the mother’s life is at risk . Provision for those serious and exceptional cases is already there in the law.
This bill puts women at risk ( as well as offering no protection to healthy late stage babies)

re you last sentence “Pro lifers always want to restrict abortion and never increase access to contraception or ensure no child suffers once it’s born.”
I’m really not sure why you have made those assumptions about me.

Exactly. Is it really so hard to require confirmation of fetal age prior to receiving pills? That’s how it was done pre-Covid and would prevent such abuses as we’ve seen lately

tropicalteas · 19/06/2025 17:35

RingoJuice · 19/06/2025 17:08

Exactly. Is it really so hard to require confirmation of fetal age prior to receiving pills? That’s how it was done pre-Covid and would prevent such abuses as we’ve seen lately

It’s like some kind of morbid nhs cost cutting exercise. No need to offer a scan and appt to verify suitability for the tablets and then some women will abort at home again saving the nhs the cost of a surgical procedure.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page