Topic: Abortion Forty Years On: Is a review of abortion law needed, and if so, on what grounds?

Introducer:

Laura Riley, Press & Public Policy Manager for the British Pregnancy Advisory Service (BPAS)

As the 40^th anniversary of the 1967 Abortion Act is reached, and the draft Human Tissue and Embryology Bill comes up for debate, groups from many quarters in the abortion policy debate have called for changes to be made to the Abortion Act. Abortion practitioners believe that a review of abortion law is needed and have argued for the removal of the requirement for two doctors’ signatures to permit an abortion. The Science & Technology Committee concluded that there is no scientific basis  - on the grounds of viability – to reduce the upper time limit.

How useful is this scientific discussion to helping us decide what our abortion law should be? Where do the needs and rights of the pregnant woman fit into the debate?

Readings:

Abortion issue on the Spiked-online website

http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/site/issues/C41/

Pro Choice Forum articles and comment about legal, ethical and social aspects of abortion

http://www.prochoiceforum.org.uk/

Second trimester abortions in England & Wales

Ingham R, Lee E, Clements S, Stone N (2007) 

Executive summary

http://www.psychology.soton.ac.uk/research/cshr/

Final report

http://www.psychology.soton.ac.uk/research/cshr/

Lord David Steel, architect of the 1967 Abortion Act, admits he never anticipated "anything like" the current number of terminations when leading the campaign for reform.

http://society.guardian.co.uk/health/story/0,,2197924,00.html

A woman's supreme right over her own body and destiny is in jeopardy. Polly Toynbee.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,2199554,00.html

What about the poor girl down at the clinic? Janice Turner

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/janice_turner/article2749057.ece

Beyond the shrill polemic. Madeleine Bunting: It is not anti-choice to want a more thoughtful

debate on why women have so many abortions.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,2201514,00.html