Latest news with #StuartWorby
Metro
2 days ago
- Politics
- Metro
Last night's abortion vote risks failing vulnerable women
Abortion is a divisive and complicated subject, as the reaction to last night's vote on decriminalising the procedure in England and Wales has already proved. But before, during, and after the debate, my main concern has been that safeguarding is paramount, and we have a responsibility to ensure women who access abortion services are kept safe. That's something I hope every MP will agree with, whatever their personal convictions. There were a number of amendments to the Crime and Policing Bill voted on last night, with Labour MP Tonia Antoniazzi proving successful. I opposed that amendment, because I felt it took away the opportunity for a woman to have a confidential discussion with a clinician so they could get the best treatment – and make sure that a telemedicine system of abortion provision wasn't being abused. My own amendment was different, and would have reinstated in-person consultations for women who wish to have an abortion – ending the 'pills by post system'. This amendment was voted down in the Commons yesterday, but I believe there is still a strong case for in-person consultations – and I'll continue to make it. My amendment was neither pro-life nor pro-choice. It was pro-safety. Face-to-face appointments were mandatory until the pandemic, when the pills-by-post scheme – which allows women to obtain abortion pills via telemedicine for unwanted pregnancies up to 10 weeks and then take them at home – was introduced as a temporary measure. However, an amendment tabled to the Health and Care Bill in March 2022 made the scheme permanent. I had considerable reservations about this at the time, and sadly my concerns have been borne out in the years since. Without an in-person discussion between patient and doctor, there is no guarantee that abortion pills won't fall into the wrong hands. Six months ago, Stuart Worby was jailed after persuading a friend's girlfriend to phone up an abortion provider, pretend to be pregnant, and obtain pills which Worby then used to induce a woman to have an abortion against her will or knowledge, after spiking a glass of orange juice. A requirement for an in-person appointment would have prevented this tragic incident from occurring. There have also been rare, but high-profile cases of women misleading abortion providers about how far along they are and accessing abortion pills through the pills-by-post scheme. But there are also many women who are simply unaware of how far into pregnancy they are. In the early stages of gestation, some women bleed and mistakenly think they are on their period, thereby underestimating the true length of their pregnancy. In the absence of in-person appointments, such situations are much harder to detect. These checks are essential for safeguarding: After 10 weeks, the law prohibits at-home use of abortion pills due to the increasing medical risks. Several cases were raised in the debate yesterday by my fellow MPs – harrowing instances where women took abortion medication and were admitted to hospital, traumatised and bleeding as a result of miscalculating their gestational age. A government review in November 2023 found that the complication rate for abortions after 20 weeks in clinical settings is over 160 times higher than for those under 10 weeks. That's why I tabled my amendment, to protect women and to avoid these risks. Restoring the requirement for in-person appointments would make it far easier for clinicians to assess the possibility of coercion or abuse, as well as more accurately assess a woman's gestational age and any health concerns. More Trending Safeguarding ought never to be sacrificed for the sake of convenience or ideology. There is always a duty of care towards all patients. My proposal would not have prevented women from being able to take abortion pills at home; it simply sought to ensure an in-person appointment first – for the safety of the women themselves. I still believe there is a case for returning to what was standard practice – for good reason – before the pandemic. I am grateful to the 117 colleagues who voted for my amendment. While the vote did not go our way, I hope the conversation about protecting women in this area will continue, and that in-person consultations will eventually be reinstated. Do you have a story you'd like to share? Get in touch by emailing Share your views in the comments below. MORE: Brain dead woman Adriana Smith gives birth after being kept alive due to law MORE: I was trolled on Tattle Life – I'm thrilled it has been exposed MORE: It's 20 years since Doctor Who's best finale – but not for reasons you think
Telegraph
11-06-2025
- Politics
- Telegraph
MPs fight to criminalise pills-by-post abortions
MPs are seeking a law change to ban the unsupervised use of abortion 'pills by post' to prevent women being coerced into terminations. Nearly 30 MPs including Sir Iain Duncan Smith, the former Tory party leader, are backing an amendment to the Government's policing Bill which would crack down on the pills-by-post scheme to prevent it being abused by coercive partners or result in mistaken terminations. The postal scheme enables women who are fewer than 10 weeks pregnant to access abortion medication after a phone or video consultation with a doctor. It was introduced in the pandemic to ensure women could continue to access terminations during early pregnancy. The scheme was made permanent in March 2022. Critics have said the removal of the requirement for an in-person medical appointment leaves the process open to abuse. Last year, a 40-year old man from Norfolk was jailed for 12 years for administering pills obtained by post to a woman without her knowledge after he crushed up the medication in a glass of orange juice. Stuart Worby's victim, who cannot be named for legal reasons, suffered a miscarriage in hospital within hours of the assault, which happened in 2022. Worby obtained the medication from a friend, who posed as a woman in need of an abortion. Require medical checks Caroline Johnson, a Tory MP, is tabling an amendment to the Crime and Policing Bill which would bar a woman from securing abortion pills for use at home without a prior in-person appointment with a doctor or appropriate medical professional. This would allow medics to check for any health risks, the woman's gestational age and the possibility of a coerced abortion. The move has already been backed by 27 MPs across six political parties and, according to new polling, has support from the public. Two-thirds of women backed a return to in-person appointments with 4 per cent in favour of the status quo, according to a poll of 2,103 adults by Whitestone Insight. Prevent 'coerced or dangerous abortions' Ms Johnson said: 'Since its introduction, the safeguarding risks caused by the 'pills by post' scheme have been evident, with one man able to obtain pills by a third party to induce a woman to have an abortion against her will or knowledge. 'Other women have taken the pills later in pregnancy, in some cases because they were mistaken about their gestation, putting themselves in danger. 'Women would continue to be able to take abortion pills at home but, in line with public support, my amendment would reinstate prior in-person consultations so medical professionals are able to accurately assess a woman's gestational age, any health risks and the risk of coercion before abortion pills can be prescribed. 'This would protect women and prevent further cases of coerced or dangerous abortions arising as a result of the pills by post scheme.' Cross-party support Among MPs backing the law change alongside Sir Iain are Tim Farron, the former Lib Dem leader; Neil O'Brien, the former health minister; Sir Edward Leigh, the Father of the House; Bob Blackman, the chairman of the Conservative 1922 Committee; Mary Glindon, the former Labour opposition whip and Rachael Maskell, the former health and social care select committee member and Labour shadow minister. Catherine Robinson, of the pro-life group Right to Life UK, said: 'The controversial amendment that made at-home abortions permanent passed by a razor-thin margin of just 27 votes. A large number of MPs raised serious concerns about the negative impact these schemes would have on women. Since then, we have seen these concerns tragically borne out.' Ms Robinson noted the case of Carla Foster, who was jailed in 2023 for taking abortion pills after the legal cut-off time during lockdown. She said: 'Women such as Carla Foster have performed at-home abortions well beyond the 24-week time limit, putting their health at serious risk. 'Had Carla Foster been given an in-person consultation, where her gestation could have been accurately determined, she would not have been able to access abortion pills, and this tragic case would have been prevented. 'The solution is clear. We urgently need to reinstate in-person appointments. 'This simple safeguard would prevent women's lives from being put at risk from self-administered late-term abortions, a danger that would be exacerbated if abortion were 'decriminalised' right up to birth.'
The Sun
06-05-2025
- The Sun
Rapists and domestic abusers have lenient prison sentences extended under new scheme
RAPISTS and domestic abusers have had years added to their prison terms after being referred for being too lenient, The Sun can reveal. Violent offenders who abused women have had their sentences increased under a scheme designed to challenge soft punishments. Data published by the Attorney General's Office shows that out of a total 48 cases heard by the Court of Appeal between January and March 2025, 33 sentences were increased. Of these 33 sentences, 15 cases related to violent and sexual offences against women and girls. Nine were drug -related sentences and other offences included robbery, manslaughter, and conspiracy to traffic contraband into prison. The largest sentence increase was for Rico Persechino who saw his jail term extended by six years after it was referred to the Court of Appeal as part of the Unduly Lenient Sentence scheme. Rico Persechino was part of an organised criminal group operating in Surrey that carried out multiple burglaries, a violent assault, and stole more than £215,000 of high-value cars. Persechino's sentence was increased from seven years' and six months to 13 years' and six months on 13 March 2025 after it was referred to the Court of Appeal. Others include Stuart Worby, 45, from Dereham, Norfolk who had his sentence increased from 12 years to 17 years after giving a woman medication which caused her to have an abortion. Ryan Sutton, 24, from Worcester, who groomed and raped a 10-year-old he met on social media had his sentence increased by three years to a total of nine years' imprisonment with a licence extension of 12 months. Jie Zhang, 42, from West London, had her sentence more than doubled from three years to eight years' imprisonment for leading an international prostitution ring that recruited sex-workers from East Asia and Europe to work in brothels across London. The Solicitor General Lucy Rigby KC MP said: 'The Unduly Lenient Sentence scheme exists to protect victims, and referrals to the Court of Appeal this year show that more perpetrators of violence against women and girls are being kept in jail for longer. 'As Solicitor General, I will continue to refer cases that are unduly lenient to the courts to ensure that justice is secured, victims in these cases are protected, and that public trust in the criminal justice system can be restored.'
