Two pro-life amendments have been tabled to the Crime and Policing Bill as it continues its passage through the House of Lords.
The first, from Baroness Eaton, would make clear that any new legal protections in Clause 191 cannot be used to shield investigation and prosecution for sex-selective abortions.
The other, from Lord Bailey of Paddington, would introduce a new requirement for a mandatory investigation whenever an abortion is performed on a girl under 16, ensuring that decriminalisation proposals don’t hide rape, abuse, exploitation, or criminal conduct.
Together, these amendments seek to protect both unborn children and vulnerable girls, and to ensure that abortion law is not exploited to conceal gender-based violence (before or after birth).
Baroness Eaton: closing the door on sex-selective abortion
Baroness Eaton’s amendment would add an explicit safeguard to Clause 191. The text of her amendment reads:
“Nothing in this section shall be taken to apply to a termination undertaken because of dissatisfaction with the sex of a child who was capable of being born alive.”
As Clause 191 would remove women from all criminal liability regarding abortion, Baroness Eaton is ensuring that nothing in this clause can be interpreted as covering, excusing, or protecting abortions carried out purely because a child is a boy or a girl. The practice has been spoken of widely recently as a Scottish Government report on their own decriminalisation proceedings used sex-selective abortion as an example to remove abortion from criminal law. While the practice can go both ways, it is often used in Eastern cultures to increase the male population by exterminating baby girls before they are born.
Many are referring to this as a wrecking amendment as it would invalidate decriminalisation where questions are raised over the motive for any termination.
The amendment’s proposer, Labour MP Tonia Antoniazzi, indicated how the amendment threatens her, telling The Independent: “The notion that this is remotely in the interests of vulnerable women is frankly absurd. For women themselves, the allegations around sex-selective abortion often focus on how women from some cultural backgrounds may face control and coercion from family members to end a pregnancy on the grounds of sex.”
She seems to think that no woman can will an abortion with any malice. Feminism has come around in a horseshoe and now killing female babies solely because of their sex is marketed as liberation.
Lord Bailey of Paddington: mandatory investigations for abortions on girls under 16
Lord Bailey’s amendment introduces a new clause after Clause 191. The full text reads:
“Mandatory investigation of abortions performed on females under the age of 16
(1) Where a termination of pregnancy is performed or facilitated in respect of a female under the age of 16, the relevant authority must initiate a mandatory investigation to determine—
(a) whether the pregnancy resulted from criminal conduct, including but not limited to sexual offences under the Sexual Offences Act 2003,
(b) whether the female was subject to coercion, exploitation, or abuse,
(c) whether any person involved in the pregnancy or termination may be liable for prosecution under applicable criminal law.
(2) For the purposes of subsection (1), “relevant authority” means—
(a) the police force for the area in which the termination was performed,
(b) any safeguarding board or child protection agency with jurisdiction over the female concerned, or
(c) any other body designated by the Secretary of State.
(3) The investigation must be initiated within seven days of notification of the termination and must be conducted in accordance with safeguarding protocols and the welfare interests of the female concerned.
(4) Nothing in this section prevents the provision of medical care or termination services in accordance with existing legal and medical standards.
(5) Any registered medical practitioner or healthcare provider who performs or facilitates a termination of pregnancy in respect of a female under the age
of 16 must, within 48 hours, notify the relevant authority as defined in subsection (2).
(6) Failure by a relevant authority to initiate an investigation under subsection (1), or failure by a medical professional to report under subsection (5), may constitute misconduct and must be subject to disciplinary proceedings or other sanctions as prescribed by regulations made by the Secretary of State.
(7) All investigations conducted under this section must ensure the confidentiality, dignity, and welfare of the female concerned, and must be carried out in a trauma-informed manner.”
Lord Bailey’s explanatory note highlights that abortion is governed by the Abortion Act 1967, and that abortions involving minors, especially those under 16, raise serious safeguarding and legal concerns. In other words, when a child is taken for an abortion, the risk of rape, incest, grooming, trafficking, or coercion is often far higher.
This amendment affirms the duty of the justice system to not allow those crimes to be hidden, as they would be were Tonia Antoniazzi’s clause to go unaltered. It would require prompt reporting by medical staff and a timely investigation by police or safeguarding bodies, helping to protect girls from further harm, and to bring perpetrators to justice.
John Deighan, SPUC CEO, says, “SPUC has long warned that abortion is used to cover up abuse, and oppress women and girls. To label abortion as purely a healthcare issue, and not a criminal one would only hide that abuse more. We gladly welcome these amendments to the Bill whilst still reaffirming our total opposition to the decriminalisation of abortion.”
If you’re reading this and haven’t yet donated to SPUC, please consider helping now. Thank You!
