Image – Wikipedia Commons: House of Lords chamber, Palace of Westminster, London
Peers in the House of Lords have raised serious concerns over Clause 191 of the Crime and Policing Bill, which would decriminalise self-induced abortion up to birth. Despite the Bill containing more than 200 clauses, debate on Tuesday was dominated by this single, controversial measure – which was not part of the original Bill.
In total, eleven peers spoke against Clause 191, with only four voicing support. The debate revealed deep unease about both the substance and process of the proposal, with several peers warning that it would remove one of the few remaining legal protections for unborn babies and expose women to greater risk.
Lord Jackson of Peterborough strongly condemned the clause, calling it “an embarrassment to supporters of abortion and a stain on our reputation as a country that claims to care for pregnant women and their unborn children.”
Former minister Lord Frost described Clause 191 as “the biggest change to abortion law since 1967,” warning that it would “make abortions up to birth more common, endanger more women because of the medical risks of termination after 24 weeks, and create pressure for a similar decriminalisation for medical practitioners themselves.”
Many peers expressed alarm that the amendment was being used to push decriminalisation by the back door, particularly in light of the “pills by post” scheme introduced during the COVID-19 pandemic. Several speakers noted the absence of any government review of the safety of telemedicine abortions, despite evidence of significant complications.
Baroness O’Loan warned that “if this is passed, women will think that aborting your baby to birth is a safe procedure, because it is lawful… this clause is too dangerous to women to remain in the Bill.”
Viscount Hailsham agreed that the clause was “wrong in principle and should be removed,” adding that “Parliament has a duty of care to unborn babies capable of being born alive.”
In a particularly powerful contribution, Baroness Lawlor argued that the clause was incompatible with the very idea of equality before the law:
“There can be no greater denigration of pregnant women than to deny them the most basic right of all, to be judged morally – and when they have committed a crime, to be judged criminally. This treats them as less than fully human adults.”
Baroness Spielman also highlighted the lack of scrutiny and evidence underpinning the measure, pointing out that there has been “no systematic review of telemedicine, despite the many red flags it has raised.”
SPUC’s polling was referenced by several peers, including Lord Jackson and Lord Elliot of Mickle Fell, who cited findings showing that over six in ten people believe abortion should remain illegal after 24 weeks.
Other peers – including Lord Farmer, Baroness Browning, Baroness Monckton and Lord Sandhurst – warned that Clause 191 would undermine vital protections against coercion and mark a profound shift in how Parliament treats the life of the unborn child.
Despite the strong opposition voiced, Government Minister Lord Hanson confirmed that the Government will remain neutral on the issue and allow a free vote when the House returns to the clause in Committee.
SPUC welcomes the courage and clarity shown by peers in defending both women and their unborn children, and will continue to campaign for Clause 191 to be removed from the Bill.
To hear more analysis of the debate and what happens next, SPUC supporters are invited to join our upcoming webinar next week.
If you’re reading this and haven’t yet donated to SPUC, please consider helping now. Thank You!
