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"

[RhiannonEMumsnet]

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/

This isn't about relaxing abortion laws. The timelines are not changing with this law. What this law does is take abortion out of the criminal justice sector - abortion is healthcare, it should be legislated in the same way that all other healthcare is.

The fact that we are seeing a substantial increase in the number of women being prosecuted for abortions, and the fact that we are seeing the police being advised to look at women's private apps if they've had a miscarriage, all suggest that this law is very badly needed.

If you are talking about Nicola Packer, she was acquitted, so not found guilty of committing any crime. The way she was treated was horrific.

According to the BBC, she was “taken into custody in the back of a police van, still bleeding, having had major surgery”.

Do you honestly think that is right?

Even The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists released guidance to say “.. it is never in the public interest to report women to the police who might have terminated pregnancies illegally”

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cp852g0l6j6o.amp

If s.60 of the Offences against the Person Act is removed, then it will no longer be a criminal offence to conceal the delivery and death an infant's body before, at or after birth.

And? So? How does putting desperate women in jail help society be better?

By taking abortion out of criminal justice, it will be easier for women to seek help and support rather than resorting to desperate measures.

And a law dating back 160 years is long overdue for some major change.

Another law that superficially sounds good but had some potentially horrible outcomes. Decriminalisation of early term abortions ok - but up to 37 weeks, absolutely not. I hadn’t even heard about this bill, but now I know that I need to write to my mo. Thank you for raising awareness.

So to which week of pregnancy do you think a woman should have bodily autonomy before the state assumes control of her body and forces her to be pregnant against her will?

24, apart from for medical reasons, under hospital care.

Agree

Completely agree about the “potentially horrible outcomes”
I’m horrified that isn’t enough acknowledgment of this.
Saying “trust women” is not enough of a safeguard.

Agree with @Sandysandyfeet
24 weeks.

Many babies can survive outside the womb after that time .

So for you at that point the pregnant woman becomes less important than the foetus?

No woman should be forced to remain pregnant against her will. That’s forced birth, a fundamental violation of human rights.

I don’t call a full term baby a foetus . I think it’s a violation of a full term baby’s rights to terminate its life

People always go on about aborting full term babies as if this is common and happens every day.

It does not.

And when it does happen, there is usually a tragic and painful story and a traumatised woman behind it all. Putting that woman in jail does not make the world a better place, it's just adding cruelty to an already horrific situation.

I don't know why people keep trotting out the idea that women have late term abortions for fun, unless it's misogyny.

I don’t think anyone has said people have abortions for fun?
I don’t think it’s misogynistic to have concerns about this proposal.

Whatever the circumstances I cannot accept that a woman who attempts to abort a near full term baby or foetus is not committing a crime. It's abhorrent.

I agree. If the baby is full term it can survive outside the womb on its own. Abortion then becomes an active killing of a viable baby .

Of course it's abhorrent. But how does jailing a traumatised woman help society or make anything better? It's revenge. It's pretending two wrongs can make a right.

And if we take abortion out of criminal justice, more women may feel able to come forward and seek help.

UK abortion law is an anomaly because abortion is never actually legal here. Far better to align with countries that do better - as I have said, I favour the NZ model.

The sentencing is a different issue.
Context would/ should be taken into consideration.
Eg if a victim of domestic abuse kills her husband we would expect the sentencing to take account of the circumstances. We wouldn’t argue that killing a husband is no longer a crime because some women do it from self defence.

If you set aside the ludicrous belief that women undertake these very late abortions for fun or because they're evil, then all you are left with is mitigating circumstances and personal tragedy. So then the question is why put these women through the stress and additional trauma of a court case if you aren't going to jail them anyway? Again, what good does it do to society? It just costs massive amounts of taxpayer money to achieve nothing. And so we're back to revenge and adding one wrong to another.

No one has the “ludicrous belief that women undertake these very late abortions for fun” . Not sure why you’re claiming that?
However - it is possible that this change to the law will lead to some truly horrible situations. ( egBabies - capable of independent life - being left to suffer and die)
I can see how this change could lead to abuse - particularly in abusive relationships or in a situation where a parent has mental health or addiction issues.
Of course there will often be mitigating circumstances and personal tragedy. That’s the case with women who kill their domestic abusers also . We don’t however say we should not make it a crime to kill your husband because no one would ever do it unless it was an extreme circumstance.

It is very relevant in the case of R v. Constance Marten and Mark Gordon, and the death of Baby Victoria (Baby A).Both were convicted of concealing the birth of a child (s.60 Offences Against the Person Act).

It should still be a crime. Nobody is suggesting women do it for fun. But it is not acceptable and should be tried as a crime. Same as manslaughter. If the jury acquits that's up to them.

You do realise that this means women who have late miscarriages will continue to end up arrested and in court? All it takes it one healthcare worker who is a forced birth advocate and who doesn't respect medical confidentiality. That is what this change is aimed at preventing. The increase in such cases recently is a huge cause for concern. These people should be weeded out and not allowed to work around women. Or in healthcare at all.

I still have no answer to.my question of how these prosecutions are in the public interest.