Pro-choice group opposes Stella Creasy's abortion amendment

Rachel Clarke, head of advocacy at the British Pregnancy Advisory Service (BPAS), said the NC20 amendment to the Criminal Justice Bill does not have the backing of abortion providers.
The amendment would remove criminal penalties for abortion in England and Wales, effectively decriminalising the procedure in all circumstances.
'We are not supporting NC20, and neither are any of the abortion providers in the country,' Ms Clarke told BBC Radio 4's Today programme on Tuesday.
She said a separate proposal, NC1, has the support of more than 50 pro-choice organisations – unlike Creasy's.
'Abortion law is incredibly complex. It governs 250,000 women's healthcare every single year,' she said.
'Because of that, it is essential that any huge change to abortion law is properly considered.
'That means involvement with providers, medical bodies, regulators – and proper debate time in Parliament.'
She warned that MPs are being asked to back a 'generational change' after just three hours of debate next week.
'For us, unfortunately, although we truly believe that we need overwhelming and generational change for abortion law, Stella Creasy's amendment is not the right way to do it,' she said.
The amendment has also been heavily criticised by anti-abortion campaigners, who say it would amount to the most extreme liberalisation of the law since the 1967 Abortion Act.
The Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (SPUC) said NC20 could allow abortions on the basis of a baby's sex and would remove protections that allow abusers who harm unborn children to be prosecuted.
SPUC said the amendment, along with another tabled by MP Tonia Antoniazzi, represents 'the greatest threat to unborn children and their mothers since the Abortion Act'.
They urged supporters to lobby their MPs to vote against both proposals, warning that abortion 'up to birth' could become possible under the changes.
Votes on the amendments are due to take place on June 17 and 18 during the report stage of the Criminal Justice Bill.
Abortion in England and Wales remains a criminal offence.
However a petition has gathered more than 103,653 signatures urging the Government at Westminster to 'remove abortion from criminal law so that no pregnant person can be criminalised for procuring their own abortion'.
It is legal with an authorised provider up to 24 weeks, with very limited circumstances allowing one after this time, such as when the mother's life is at risk or the child would be born with a severe disability.
During a recent Westminster debate, Labour MP Tony Vaughan said it is time to 'abandon these outdated practices' of prosecuting women.
He said: 'I believe that our laws cannot be fixed relics of the past but must reflect social attitudes and societal norms.'
He insisted 'decriminalisation does not mean deregulation' and that he has not seen evidence 'to suggest that removing the criminal law deterrent would then motivate swathes of women to have abortions after 24 weeks'.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Daily Mirror

11 hours ago

• Daily Mirror

Wes Streeting says there 'isn't a budget' in NHS for assisted dying law

The Health Secretary - one of the top opponents of the legislation - said assisted dying would take 'time and money' away from other parts of the health service Wes Streeting has claimed there "isn't a budget" in the NHS for assisted dying services after a historic Commons vote on the issue. The Health Secretary - one of the most senior opponents of the legislation - said it would take "time and money" away from other parts of the health service. On Friday the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill was passed by MPs with a majority of 23 in a move championed by campaigners. ‌ Keir Starmer and Chancellor Rachel Reeves voted for the legislation, which would allow terminally ill adults with six months left to live the option to end their life early. The application would be approved by two doctors and an expert panel featuring a social worker, senior legal figure and psychiatrist. ‌ But Mr Streeting was among several Cabinet ministers, including Deputy PM Angela Rayner and Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood, to vote against the bill. In a post on his Facebook page over the weekend, said he had "no doubt that this is a major and profound social change for our NHS and our country". READ MORE: Assisted dying law PASSES Commons in historic moment - see how your MP voted He said the Department of Health and Social Care "will continue to work constructively with Parliament to assist on technical aspects of the Bill" as it goes through the House of Lords. But he warned: "Even with the savings that might come from assisted dying if people take up the service - and it feels uncomfortable talking about savings in this context to be honest - setting up this service will also take time and money that is in short supply. "There isn't a budget for this. Politics is about prioritising. It is a daily series of choices and trade-offs. I fear we've made the wrong one." Assisted dying campaigner Dame Esther Rantzen also urged peers not to block the landmark legislation. Dame Esther told BBC Radio 4's Today programme on Saturday: "I don't need to teach the House of Lords how to do their job. ‌ "They know it very well, and they know that laws are produced by the elected chamber. Their job is to scrutinise, to ask questions, but not to oppose. "So yes, people who are adamantly opposed to this Bill, and they have a perfect right to oppose it, will try and stop it going through the Lords, but the Lords themselves, their duty is to make sure that law is actually created by the elected chamber, which is the House of Commons who have voted this through." Dame Esther, who has terminal cancer, acknowledged the legislation would probably not become law in time for her to use it and she would have to "buzz off to Zurich" to use the Dignitas clinic.

ITV News

a day ago

• ITV News

Health Secretary says Asissted dying will take 'time and money' away from the NHS

Wes Streeting has warned that legalising assisted dying would take 'time and money' away from other parts of the health service. The Health Secretary, who opposed the legislation in the Commons, said better end-of-life care was needed to prevent terminally ill people feeling they had no alternative but to end their own life. Streeting, writing on his Facebook page, said he could not ignore the concerns 'about the risks that come with this Bill' raised by the Royal College of Psychiatrists, the Royal College of Physicians, the Association for Palliative Medicine and charities representing under-privileged groups. The Government is neutral on the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill which cleared the Commons with a majority of 23 votes on Friday. Streeting, who was one of the most senior opponents of the legislation, said: 'Gordon Brown wrote this week that 'there is no effective freedom to choose if the alternative option, the freedom to draw on high-quality end-of-life care, is not available. "Neither is there real freedom to choose if, as many fear, patients will feel under pressure to relieve their relatives of the burden of caring for them, a form of coercion that prioritising good end-of-life care would diminish.' He is right. 'The truth is that creating those conditions will take time and money. 'Even with the savings that might come from assisted dying if people take up the service – and it feels uncomfortable talking about savings in this context to be honest – setting up this service will also take time and money that is in short supply. 'There isn't a budget for this. Politics is about prioritising. It is a daily series of choices and trade-offs. I fear we've made the wrong one.' Streeting said his Department of Health and Social Care 'will continue to work constructively with Parliament to assist on technical aspects of the Bill' as it goes through the House of Lords. Assisted dying campaigner Dame Esther Rantzen urged peers not to block the landmark legislation. Dame Esther told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: 'I don't need to teach the House of Lords how to do their job. 'They know it very well, and they know that laws are produced by the elected chamber. 'Their job is to scrutinise, to ask questions, but not to oppose. 'So yes, people who are adamantly opposed to this Bill, and they have a perfect right to oppose it, will try and stop it going through the Lords, but the Lords themselves, their duty is to make sure that law is actually created by the elected chamber, which is the House of Commons who have voted this through.' Dame Esther, who turns 85 on Sunday and has terminal cancer, acknowledged the legislation would probably not become law in time for her to use it and she would have to 'buzz off to Zurich' to use the Dignitas clinic. Paralympian and crossbench peer Baroness Tanni Grey-Thompson told BBC Breakfast: 'We're getting ready for it to come to the Lords and from my personal point of view, about amending it to make it stronger. 'We've been told it's the strongest Bill in the world, but to be honest, it's not a very high bar for other legislation. 'So I do think there are a lot more safeguards that could be put in.'

North Wales Chronicle

a day ago

• North Wales Chronicle

Streeting: Assisted dying will take ‘time and money that is in short supply'

The Health Secretary, who opposed the legislation in the Commons, said better end-of-life care was needed to prevent terminally ill people feeling they had no alternative but to end their own life. Mr Streeting, writing on his Facebook page, said he could not ignore the concerns 'about the risks that come with this Bill' raised by the Royal College of Psychiatrists, the Royal College of Physicians, the Association for Palliative Medicine and charities representing under-privileged groups. The Government is neutral on the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill which cleared the Commons with a majority of 23 votes on Friday. Mr Streeting, who was one of the most senior opponents of the legislation, said: 'Gordon Brown wrote this week that 'there is no effective freedom to choose if the alternative option, the freedom to draw on high-quality end-of-life care, is not available. Neither is there real freedom to choose if, as many fear, patients will feel under pressure to relieve their relatives of the burden of caring for them, a form of coercion that prioritising good end-of-life care would diminish.' He is right. 'The truth is that creating those conditions will take time and money. 'Even with the savings that might come from assisted dying if people take up the service – and it feels uncomfortable talking about savings in this context to be honest – setting up this service will also take time and money that is in short supply. 'There isn't a budget for this. Politics is about prioritising. It is a daily series of choices and trade-offs. I fear we've made the wrong one.' Mr Streeting said his Department of Health and Social Care 'will continue to work constructively with Parliament to assist on technical aspects of the Bill' as it goes through the House of Lords. Assisted dying campaigner Dame Esther Rantzen urged peers not to block the landmark legislation. Dame Esther told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: 'I don't need to teach the House of Lords how to do their job. 'They know it very well, and they know that laws are produced by the elected chamber. 'Their job is to scrutinise, to ask questions, but not to oppose. 'So yes, people who are adamantly opposed to this Bill, and they have a perfect right to oppose it, will try and stop it going through the Lords, but the Lords themselves, their duty is to make sure that law is actually created by the elected chamber, which is the House of Commons who have voted this through.' Dame Esther, who turns 85 on Sunday and has terminal cancer, acknowledged the legislation would probably not become law in time for her to use it and she would have to 'buzz off to Zurich' to use the Dignitas clinic. Paralympian and crossbench peer Baroness Tanni Grey-Thompson told BBC Breakfast: 'We're getting ready for it to come to the Lords and from my personal point of view, about amending it to make it stronger. 'We've been told it's the strongest Bill in the world, but to be honest, it's not a very high bar for other legislation. 'So I do think there are a lot more safeguards that could be put in.' Conservative peer and disability rights campaigner Lord Shinkwin said the narrow Commons majority underlined the need for peers to take a close look at the legislation. He told Today 'I think the House of Lords has a duty to expose and to subject this Bill to forensic scrutiny' but 'I don't think it's a question of blocking it so much as performing our duty as a revising chamber'. Lord Shinkwin added: 'The margin yesterday was so close that many MPs would appreciate the opportunity to look at this again in respect of safeguards as they relate to those who feel vulnerable, whether that's disabled people or older people.' Labour MP Kim Leadbeater, who steered the Bill through the Commons, told the PA news agency she hoped peers would not seek to derail the legislation, which could run out of parliamentary time if it is held up in the Lords. She said: 'I would be upset to think that anybody was playing games with such an important and such an emotional issue.'