In a debate in the House of Lords yesterday, 12 November, over the provision of abortion pills via remote consultation (so-called “telemedical abortion”), the government strongly rejected calls to reinstate face-to-face requirements or otherwise restrict the policy.
Baroness O’Loan asked the Government “what assessment they have made of recent proposals to extend access to telemedical abortions, and how they will ensure women’s safety and informed consent in the absence of in-person medical consultation.”
She sounded the alarm about the deep flaws in the pills-by-post system, warning that it strips away vital safeguards that once protected women and their unborn children.
She told the Lords that remote abortion “makes it difficult to assure a woman’s privacy, to ensure she is not being coerced, or to verify that the woman seeking the medication is actually the person who will take it, particularly in cases involving domestic abuse, child abuse and trafficking.”
Citing hospital data, Baroness O’Loan said:
“Since 2020, 54,000 people have been admitted to hospital in England for complications from abortion pills… Last year alone, some 12,000 — over 6% of women taking such medication — required hospital treatment.”
These shocking figures highlight the serious physical and emotional dangers that women face under the government’s current regime.
Ministers defend the policy — and refuse to act
Despite these warnings, Baroness Merron, speaking for the Government, insisted that there were “no plans” to change the law or reinstate in-person requirements. She claimed that abortion “is a matter for Parliament” and defended the safety of the scheme using statements from pro-abortion organisations such as the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists and the World Health Organization.
The Minister flatly rejected the figures cited by Baroness O’Loan, asserting that the Government “does not recognise” them — yet failed to provide any alternative data. She went so far as to claim that pills-by-post abortion was helping women, saying that “the data thus far does not flag a difficulty in respect of telemedicine.”
SPUC: a reckless policy putting women and babies at risk
SPUC has repeatedly warned that pills-by-post abortion is one of the most dangerous public-health policies ever introduced in Britain.
Women have been left to bleed and suffer alone at home, often with no medical supervision, and babies have been aborted far beyond the legal limit because gestational age cannot be verified remotely.
The system is also wide open to abuse. Without face-to-face contact, it is impossible to ensure that the woman requesting the pills is not being coerced by a partner, family member or trafficker. There is also no reliable way to confirm her true identity or gestational stage — both vital legal requirements under the Abortion Act 1967.
There is concern about this policy across Parliament. An amendment was tabled in the House of Commons to the Crime and Policing Bill (the same Bill that was amended to decriminalise abortion) which would have ended the policy. Now that the Bill is in the House of Lords, many peers have expressed concerns with it, and Baroness Stroud has tabled an amendment to restore in-person appointments.
Alithea Williams, SPUC’s Public Policy Manager, said: “We welcome that Baroness O’Loan has raised this crucial issue. A majority of abortions are now carried out using pills by post, but we cannot allow it to become normal. Even supporters of abortion should be able to agree that this policy is dangerous for women. Simply ignoring the evidence is not good enough. We must take every opportunity to fight this policy, including when the Crime and Policing Bill is next debated in January.”
Click here for more information, and to write to your MP.
Click here to write to Lords, opposing the amendment to decriminalise abortion (clause 191) and supporting Baroness Stroud’s amendment to end the pills by post policy.
If you’re reading this and haven’t yet donated to SPUC, please consider helping now. Thank You!
