Connect with us

Published

on

The next front is rapidly emerging in the struggle between supporters and opponents of legal abortion, and that escalating conflict is increasing the chances that the issue will shape the 2024 election as it did last Novembers midterm contest.

President Joe Biden triggered the new confrontation with a flurry of recent moves to expand access to the drugs used in medication abortions, which now account for more than half of all abortions performed in the United States. Medication abortion involves two drugs: mifepristone followed by misoprostol (which is also used to prevent stomach ulcers). Although abortion opponents question the drugs safety, multiple scientific studies have found few serious adverse effects beyond headache or cramping.

Federal regulation of the use and distribution of these drugs by agencies including the FDA and the United States Postal Service has long been overshadowed in the abortion debate by the battles over Supreme Court nominations and federal legislation to ban or authorize abortion nationwide. But with a conservative majority now entrenched in the Court, and little chance that Congress will pass national legislation in either direction any time soon, abortion supporters and opponents are focusing more attention on executive-branch actions that influence the availability of the pills.

Read: The abortion backup plan no one is talking about

The reality of abortion care has been changing very, very rapidly, and now the politics are catching up with it, Celinda Lake, a Democratic pollster who served as one of Bidens advisers in 2020, told me.

Tens of thousands of anti-abortion activists will descend on Washington today for their annual March for Lifethe first since the Supreme Court last summer overturned Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision that established a nationwide right to abortion. The activists will cheer the swift moves by some two dozen Republican-controlled states to ban or severely restrict abortion since the Court struck down Roe.

But even as abortion opponents celebrate, they are growing more frustrated about the increased reliance on the drugs, which are now used in 54 percent of U.S. abortionsup dramatically from less than one-third less than a decade ago, according to the Guttmacher Institute, a research group that supports abortion rights. With the overturning of Roe, [with] COVID, and with President Bidens loosening of the restrictions on these [drugs] there is a new frontier that everyone is pivoting to, Rebecca Parma, the legislative director for Texas Right to Life, a prominent anti-abortion group, told me.

George W. Bush and Donald Trump, the two Republicans who have held the presidency since the drugs were first approved under Democratic President Bill Clinton, in 2000, took virtually no steps to limit their availability. But conservative activists are already signaling that they will press the Republican presidential candidates in 2024 for more forceful action.

Our job is to make sure this becomes an issue that any GOP candidate will have to answer and address, Kristan Hawkins, the president of the anti-abortion group Students for Life of America, told me. No one can be ambivalent again; it will simply not be an option.

The challenge for Republicans is that the 2022 midterm elections sent an unmistakable signal of resistance to further abortion restrictions in almost all of the key swing states that tipped the 2020 presidential election and are likely to decide the 2024 contest. Would you really want to be Ron DeSantis or Donald Trump running in a close election saying, Im going to ban all abortion pills in Michigan or Pennsylvania right now? says Mary Ziegler, a law professor at UC Davis, who has written extensively on the history of the abortion debate.

Sunday is the 50th anniversary of the original Roe decision, and the Biden administration will mark the occasion with a defiant pro-abortion-rights speech from Vice President Kamala Harris in Florida, where GOP Governor DeSantis, a likely 2024 presidential contender, signed a 15-week abortion ban last April.

White House officials see access to abortion medication as the next battlefront in the larger struggle over the procedure, Jennifer Klein, the director of the White House Gender Policy Council, told me. She said she expects Republicans to mount more sweeping efforts to restrict access to the drugs than they did during the Bush or Trump presidencies. The reason youve seen both Democratic and Republican administrations ensure access to medication abortions is because this is the FDA following their evidence-based scientific judgment, she said. So what I think is different now is you are seeing some pretty extreme actions as the next way to double down on taking away reproductive health and reproductive rights.

Federal regulation of the abortion drugs has followed a consistent pattern, with Democratic presidents moving to expand access and Republican presidents mostly accepting those actions.

Read: The other abortion pill

During the 2000 presidential campaign, for instance, George W. Bush called the Clinton administrations initial approval of mifepristone wrong and said he worried it would lead to more abortions. But over Bushs two terms, his three FDA commissioners ignored a citizen petition from conservative groups to revoke approval for the drug. Under Barack Obama, the FDA formalized relatively onerous rules for the use of mifepristone. Physicians had to obtain a special certification to prescribe the drug, women had to meet with their doctor once before receiving it and twice after, and it could be used only within the first seven weeks of pregnancy.

The FDA loosened these restrictions during Obamas final year in office. It reduced the number of physician visits required to obtain the drugs from three to one and increased to 10 the number of weeks into a pregnancy the drugs could be used. The revisions also permitted other medical professionals, such as nurses, to prescribe the drugs if they received certification, and eliminated a requirement for providers to report adverse effects other than death. Trump didnt reverse any of the Obama decisions. He did side with conservatives by fighting a lawsuit from abortion-rights advocates to lift the requirement for an in-person doctors visit to obtain the drugs during the COVID pandemic. But by the time the Supreme Court ruled for the Trump administration in January 2021, Biden was days away from taking office. Within months, women seeking an abortion could consult with a doctor via telehealth and then receive the pills via mail.

On January 3 of this year, the FDA took another major step by allowing pharmacies to dispense the drugs. In late December, the Justice Department issued a legal opinion that the Postal Service could deliver the drugs without violating the 19th-century Comstock Act, which bars use of the mail to corrupt the public morals.

The paradox is that the impact of these rules, for now, will be felt almost entirely in the states where abortion remains legal. Obtaining abortion pills there will be much more comparable to filling any other prescription. But 19 red states have passed laws that still require medical professionals to be present when the drugs are administered, which prevents pharmacies from offering them despite the FDA authorization. And although the FDA has approved use of mifepristone for the first 10 weeks of pregnancy, medical professionals cannot prescribe the drugs in violation of state time limits (or absolute bans) on abortion. In terms of anti-abortion states, the Biden administrations actions have had basically no impact, Greer Donley, a University of Pittsburgh law professor who studies abortion law, told me in an email.

Although the red states have largely walled themselves off from Bidens efforts on medication abortion, conservatives have launched a multifront attempt to roll back access to the pills nationwide. Students for Life has filed another citizen petition with the FDA, arguing that doctors who prescribe the drugs must dispose of any fetal remains as meical waste. In a joint letter released last week, 22 Republican attorneys general hinted that they may sue to overturn the new FDA rules permitting pharmacies to dispense the drugs. In November, another coalition of conservative groups filed a lawsuit before a Trump-appointed judge in Texas seeking to overturn the original certification and ban mifepristone. Jenny Ma, the senior counsel at the Center for Reproductive Rights, says that decision could ultimately have a broader effect than even the Supreme Court ruling overturning Roe: This case, she told me, could effectively ban medication abortion nationwide. It means people in every state may not be able to get abortion pills.

Republicans will also ramp up legislative action against the pills, although their proposals have no chance of becoming law while Democrats control the Senate and Biden holds the veto pen. Republican Senator Cindy Hyde-Smith of Mississippi is planning to reintroduce her SAVE Moms and Babies Act, which would restore the prohibition against dispensing abortion drugs through the mail or at pharmacies.

From the May 2022 issue: The future of abortion in a post-Roe America

However these legal and legislative challenges are resolved, its already apparent that the 2024 GOP presidential field will face more pressure than before to propose executive-branch actions against the drugs. Thats going to be our clarion call in 2024, says Kristi Hamrick, a long-term social-conservative activist, who now serves as the chief strategist for media and policy at Students for Life.

Katie Glenn, the state-policy director at Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, told me that, at the least, the group wants 2024 Republican presidential candidates to press for restoring the requirement to report adverse consequences from the drugs. Former Vice President Mike Pence, a likely candidate, has already suggested that he will support a ban on dispensing the pills through the mail. But the anti-abortion movements long-term goal remains the same: ban mifepristone altogether. Hawkins shows the growing fervor GOP candidates will face when she says, This pill is a cancer that has now metastasized throughout our country.

Simultaneously, abortion-rights advocates are pushing the Biden administration to loosen restrictions even further. Medication abortion has been overregulated for far too long, Ma told me. Many advocates want the FDA to extend permitted use of mifepristone from 10 to 12 weeks, eliminate the requirement that the professionals prescribing the drugs receive a special certification, and begin the process toward eventually making the drug available over the counter.

The immediate question is whether the Biden administration will challenge the red-state laws that have stymied its efforts to expand access. Advocates have argued that a legal case can be made for national FDA regulations to trump state restrictions, such as the requirement for physicians to dispense the drugs. But Biden is likely to proceed cautiously.

We dont have a lot of answers because, frankly, states have not tried to do this stuff in hundreds of years, Ziegler, the author of the upcoming book Roe: The History of a National Obsession, told me. Even so, she added, its a reasonable assumption that this conservative-dominated Supreme Court would resist allowing the federal government to preempt state rules on how the drugs are dispensed.

These mirror-image pressures in each party increase the odds of a clear distinction between Biden (or another Democrat) and the 2024 GOP nominee over access to the drugs. Democrats are generally confident they will benefit from almost any contrast that keeps abortion prominent in the 2024 race. Some, like Lake, see access to the pills as a powerful lever to do that. The issue, she argues, is relevant to younger voters, who are much more familiar than older people with the growing use of medication abortion and are especially dubious that pharmacies can offer certain drugs in some states but not in others.

The impact of abortion on the 2022 election was more complex than is often discussed. As Ive written, in the red states that have banned or restricted the practice, such as Florida, Ohio, and Texas, there was no discernible backlash against the Republican governors or state legislators who passed those laws. But the story was different in the blue and purple states where abortion remains legal. In pivotal states including Arizona, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, a clear majority of voters said they supported abortion rights, and, according to media exit polls, crushing majorities of them voted against Republican gubernatorial candidates who pledged to restrict abortion. Those Democratic victories in the states likely to prove decisive again in 2024 have left many Republican strategists leery of pursuing any further constraints on abortion.

Whats clear now is that even as abortion opponents gather to celebrate their long-sought toppling of Roe, many of them wont be satisfied until they have banned the procedure nationwide. It is totally unacceptable for a presidential candidate to say, Its just up to the states now, Marilyn Musgrave, the vice president for government affairs at the Susan B. Anthony group, told me. We need a federal role clearly laid out by these presidential candidates. Equally clear is that abortion opponents now view federal regulatory actions to restrict, and eventually ban, abortion drugs as a crucial interim step on that path. The U.S. may seem in some ways to be settling into an uneasy new equilibrium, with abortion banned in some states and permitted in others. But, as the escalating battle over abortion medication makes clear, access to abortion in every state will remain on the ballot in 2024.

Continue Reading

Business

US-UK trade deal ‘done’, says Trump as he meets Starmer at G7

Published

on

By

US-UK trade deal 'done', says Trump as he meets Starmer at G7

The UK-US trade deal has been signed and is “done”, US President Donald Trump has said as he met Sir Keir Starmer at the G7 summit.

The US president told reporters: “We signed it, and it’s done. It’s a fair deal for both. It’ll produce a lot of jobs, a lot of income.”

As Mr Trump and his British counterpart exited a mountain lodge in the Canadian Rockies where the summit is being held, the US president held up a physical copy of the trade agreement to show reporters.

Several leaves of paper fell from the binding, and Mr Starmer quickly bent down to pick them up, saying: “A very important document.”

President Donald Trump drops papers as he meets with Britain's Prime Minister Keir Starmer in Kananaskis, Canada. Pic: AP
Image:
President Donald Trump drops papers as he meets with Britain’s Prime Minister Keir Starmer in Kananaskis, Canada. Pic: AP

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Sir Keir Starmer hastily collects the signed executive order documents from the ground and hands them back to the US president.

Sir Keir said the document “implements” the deal to cut tariffs on cars and aerospace, adding: “So this is a very good day for both of our countries – a real sign of strength.”

Mr Trump added that the UK was “very well protected” against any future tariffs, saying: “You know why? Because I like them”.

However, he did not say whether levies on British steel exports to the US would be set to 0%, saying “we’re gonna let you have that information in a little while”.

Sir Keir Starmer picks up paper from the UK-US trade deal after Donald Trump dropped it at the G7 summit. Pic: Reuters
Image:
Sir Keir Starmer picks up paper from the UK-US trade deal after Donald Trump dropped it at the G7 summit. Pic: Reuters

What exactly does trade deal being ‘done’ mean?

The government says the US “has committed” to removing tariffs (taxes on imported goods) on UK aerospace goods, such as engines and aircraft parts, which currently stand at 10%.

That is “expected to come into force by the end of the month”.

Tariffs on car imports will drop from 27.5% to 10%, the government says, which “saves car manufacturers hundreds of millions a year, and protects tens of thousands of jobs”.

The White House says there will be a quota of 100,000 cars eligible for import at that level each year.

But on steel, the story is a little more complicated.

The UK is the only country exempted from the global 50% tariff rate on steel – which means the UK rate remains at the original level of 25%.

That tariff was expected to be lifted entirely, but the government now says it will “continue to go further and make progress towards 0% tariffs on core steel products as agreed”.

The White House says the US will “promptly construct a quota at most-favoured-nation rates for steel and aluminium articles”.

Other key parts of the deal include import and export quotas for beef – and the government is keen to emphasise that “any US imports will need to meet UK food safety standards”.

There is no change to tariffs on pharmaceuticals for the moment, and the government says “work will continue to protect industry from any further tariffs imposed”.

The White House says they “committed to negotiate significantly preferential treatment outcomes”.

Mr Trump also praised Sir Keir as a “great” prime minister, adding: “We’ve been talking about this deal for six years, and he’s done what they haven’t been able to do.”

He added: “We’re very longtime partners and allies and friends and we’ve become friends in a short period of time.

“He’s slightly more liberal than me to put it mildly… but we get along.”

Sir Keir added that “we make it work”.

The US president appeared to mistakenly refer to a “trade agreement with the European Union” at one point as he stood alongside the British prime minister.

Mr Trump announced his “Liberation Day” tariffs on countries in April. At the time, he announced 10% “reciprocal” rates on all UK exports – as well as separately announced 25% levies on cars and steel.

Read more:
G7 summit ‘all about the Donald’ – analysis
Scrambled G7 agenda as leaders race to de-escalate Israel-Iran conflict

In a joint televised phone call in May, Sir Keir and Mr Trump announced the UK and US had agreed on a trade deal – but added the details were being finalised.

Ahead of the G7 summit, the prime minister said he would meet Mr Trump for “one-on-one” talks, and added the agreement “really matters for the vital sectors that are safeguarded under our deal, and we’ve got to implement that”.

Continue Reading

Politics

US-UK trade deal ‘done’, says Trump as he meets Starmer at G7

Published

on

By

US-UK trade deal 'done', says Trump as he meets Starmer at G7

The UK-US trade deal has been signed and is “done”, US President Donald Trump has said as he met Sir Keir Starmer at the G7 summit.

The US president told reporters: “We signed it, and it’s done. It’s a fair deal for both. It’ll produce a lot of jobs, a lot of income.”

As Mr Trump and his British counterpart exited a mountain lodge in the Canadian Rockies where the summit is being held, the US president held up a physical copy of the trade agreement to show reporters.

Several leaves of paper fell from the binding, and Mr Starmer quickly bent down to pick them up, saying: “A very important document.”

President Donald Trump drops papers as he meets with Britain's Prime Minister Keir Starmer in Kananaskis, Canada. Pic: AP
Image:
President Donald Trump drops papers as he meets with Britain’s Prime Minister Keir Starmer in Kananaskis, Canada. Pic: AP

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Sir Keir Starmer hastily collects the signed executive order documents from the ground and hands them back to the US president.

Sir Keir said the document “implements” the deal to cut tariffs on cars and aerospace, adding: “So this is a very good day for both of our countries – a real sign of strength.”

Mr Trump added that the UK was “very well protected” against any future tariffs, saying: “You know why? Because I like them”.

However, he did not say whether levies on British steel exports to the US would be set to 0%, saying “we’re gonna let you have that information in a little while”.

Sir Keir Starmer picks up paper from the UK-US trade deal after Donald Trump dropped it at the G7 summit. Pic: Reuters
Image:
Sir Keir Starmer picks up paper from the UK-US trade deal after Donald Trump dropped it at the G7 summit. Pic: Reuters

What exactly does trade deal being ‘done’ mean?

The government says the US “has committed” to removing tariffs (taxes on imported goods) on UK aerospace goods, such as engines and aircraft parts, which currently stand at 10%.

That is “expected to come into force by the end of the month”.

Tariffs on car imports will drop from 27.5% to 10%, the government says, which “saves car manufacturers hundreds of millions a year, and protects tens of thousands of jobs”.

The White House says there will be a quota of 100,000 cars eligible for import at that level each year.

But on steel, the story is a little more complicated.

The UK is the only country exempted from the global 50% tariff rate on steel – which means the UK rate remains at the original level of 25%.

That tariff was expected to be lifted entirely, but the government now says it will “continue to go further and make progress towards 0% tariffs on core steel products as agreed”.

The White House says the US will “promptly construct a quota at most-favoured-nation rates for steel and aluminium articles”.

Other key parts of the deal include import and export quotas for beef – and the government is keen to emphasise that “any US imports will need to meet UK food safety standards”.

There is no change to tariffs on pharmaceuticals for the moment, and the government says “work will continue to protect industry from any further tariffs imposed”.

The White House says they “committed to negotiate significantly preferential treatment outcomes”.

Mr Trump also praised Sir Keir as a “great” prime minister, adding: “We’ve been talking about this deal for six years, and he’s done what they haven’t been able to do.”

He added: “We’re very longtime partners and allies and friends and we’ve become friends in a short period of time.

“He’s slightly more liberal than me to put it mildly… but we get along.”

Sir Keir added that “we make it work”.

The US president appeared to mistakenly refer to a “trade agreement with the European Union” at one point as he stood alongside the British prime minister.

Mr Trump announced his “Liberation Day” tariffs on countries in April. At the time, he announced 10% “reciprocal” rates on all UK exports – as well as separately announced 25% levies on cars and steel.

Read more:
G7 summit ‘all about the Donald’ – analysis
Scrambled G7 agenda as leaders race to de-escalate Israel-Iran conflict

In a joint televised phone call in May, Sir Keir and Mr Trump announced the UK and US had agreed on a trade deal – but added the details were being finalised.

Ahead of the G7 summit, the prime minister said he would meet Mr Trump for “one-on-one” talks, and added the agreement “really matters for the vital sectors that are safeguarded under our deal, and we’ve got to implement that”.

Continue Reading

Politics

Abortion debate reignited as Sky poll reveals public’s view on decriminalisation ahead of Commons vote

Published

on

By

Abortion debate reignited as Sky poll reveals public's view on decriminalisation ahead of Commons vote

A small group have gathered in the main square in the centre of Birmingham, and it’s a real mix of people. There are older figures from the community, young students, as well as groups of friends and some families.

On closer inspection, you can make out candles and rosary beads, signalling it’s some kind of vigil. As hymns start to be sung, it’s revealed to be a gathering to protest against abortion.

Nearly 90% of this country is pro-choice, but a small, vocal minority is becoming more organised in the UK.

Energised by the Trump administration, young and old activists in the UK anti-abortion movement have become more motivated to get their message across.

And all this is happening just as abortion laws in the UK could be about to go through the most significant change in over 50 years.

Pro-life and pro-choice campaigners protesting in London
Image:
Pro-choice campaigners (left) at London’s High Court in July 2023 and a pro-life demonstration (right) outside parliament in May 2024. Pic: Reuters/PA

Nearly three years on from the ruling reversing Roe v Wade – a landmark case that once made abortion legal in the US – the age-old abortion debate has become even more political in the UK.

A breakthrough moment came when Vice President JD Vance criticised the UK laws on abortion buffer zones – areas outside clinics where police are allowed to use their discretion to stop anyone harassing women entering abortion clinics.

More from UK

Explained: What are the UK’s abortion laws?

One of the cases cited by the vice president was that of Isabel Vaughan-Spruce.

She’s a lifelong anti-abortion activist who has been handing out leaflets outside clinics for 20 years. Since buffer zones came into force, she now visits to silently pray once a week. In 2022, she was arrested outside an abortion clinic for silent prayer and taken to court, although the charges were later dropped.

She also received £13,000 in a civil claim against West Midlands Police, which did not admit liability.

“They actually asked me what I was doing, and I said, well, I’m just physically standing here. I might be praying in my head, but nothing out loud. And on that basis, they made an arrest. I was heavily searched, I was taken to the police station, locked in a police cell for hours before being questioned under caution. And then, eventually, I went to court.

“I believe that abortion centres are like the modern-day Calvary. This is where the innocent are being put to death. I might not be physically interacting with anybody or stopping anyone or talking to anyone, just to be there in prayer is really, really important from a spiritual perspective.”

Isabel Vaughan-Spruce from the anti-abortion campaign group, March for Life UK
Image:
Isabel Vaughan-Spruce, an anti-abortion activist, was arrested by police near an abortion clinic, although charges were later dropped


For people like Ailish McEntee, any type of protest is a distraction, which she says is not wanted by the women who come to the clinic she works at in London. She’s hoping that this week MPs will go further on abortion laws and pass an amendment through the Commons to decriminalise abortion for anyone seeking an abortion up to 24 weeks.

“The law itself works very well for the majority of people, but for those individuals in those kind of really high-risk domestic abuse situations… they maybe can’t make it to a clinic, they might seek abortion care from those kind of unregulated providers.

“So this amendment would take away that decriminalisation of women themselves. And it’s a really strange part of the law that we have.

“I think particularly in recent years, with Roe v Wade overturning and Donald Trump winning the election again, I think it’s really pushed forward the anti-choice rhetoric that has always been there, but it’s absolutely ramping up.”

Ailish McEntee, a safeguarding midwife for abortion provider MSI Reproductive Choices UK
Image:
Ailish McEntee works at an abortion provider and wants to see a change in the law


According to polling by Sky News and YouGov, 55% of people are in favour of the law changing to stop women being criminalised for their own abortion before 24 weeks.

Surprisingly though, 22% said they believe women should be investigated or imprisoned for abortion after 24 weeks.

Stella Creasy is one of the MPs laying down an amendment to try to decriminalise abortion.

“There’s no other health care provision that we see with a criminal foundation in this way and it has a very real practical consequence.

“We’ve seen some incredibly vulnerable women and girls who didn’t even know that they were pregnant who have late-term miscarriages finding themselves with police officers rather than counsellors at their hospital beds finding themselves under suspicion for months, if not years, and I just don’t think that’s where the British public are at.”

Stella Creasy MP, Labour
Image:
Labour MP, Stella Creasy, hopes her amendment will see abortion decriminalised

But Rachel is concerned by this amendment. She runs sessions at the UK arm of Rachel’s Vineyard – a faith-based organisation originally founded in the United States, dedicated to, in their words, “healing the trauma of abortion”. They frame abortion not as a medical procedure, but as a harm to mothers and fathers.

“With all sudden deaths, whether you are 80 years of age or you’re 26 weeks born, you know, out of the womb, and you’ve died, you’ve sadly died, we need to be able to investigate that. For us to have compassion, we need to have justice.”

Rachel Mackenzie, facilitator at Rachel's Vineyard UK, a faith-based organisation supporting women who have had an abortion
Image:
Rachel Mackenzie runs sessions at a faith-based organisation and is worried about any reforms to current abortion legislation

In Northern Ireland, where the decriminalisation battle was won in 2019, I met Emma, who fought on the campaign at Alliance for Choice.

She says police searches were a daily routine for her, and since 2019, she has been able to continue helping women navigate abortion care without the threat of being investigated.

Emma Campbell, co-convenor of Alliance for Choice, an abortion rights organisation in Northern Ireland
Image:
Emma Campbell helps women navigate abortion care in Northern Ireland, where decriminalisation was secured in 2019

Read more:
Farage: Abortion ‘ludicrous’ up to 24 weeks
Pro-choice campaigners back legal change
Woman not guilty of illegal abortion
Social media’s illicit abortion trade

Orfhlaith Campbell should have been one of the lucky ones. She was able to seek a medical abortion at 23 weeks in Northern Ireland, two years after it had been decriminalised, but she says she had to fight to get the care she needed.

She was on the cusp of the medical time limit when she suffered a premature rupture of membranes, went into labour and was told she would likely develop sepsis.

Orfhlaith Campbell, who had an abortion at 23 weeks, but she says she had to fight to get the care she needed in Northern Ireland
Image:
Orfhlaith Campbell, who had an abortion at 23 weeks in Northern Ireland, says she had to fight to get the care she needed

“I would have died and my daughter was dying, I could feel her dying, and it was a compassionate choice. When we got the post-mortem after, the infection had went into her wee body too, and she had nuclear debris in her lungs. If she had survived at all, it would have been a very, very painful existence.

“So yes, I had to break through the stigma that had been ingrained in me in Northern Ireland. I had to break through legal fights and the barriers that were being put in place. But I was strong enough to know that that was compassionate and that healthcare was needed both for me and her.”

The UK is majority pro-choice, and our polling shows the majority are for decriminalising abortion.

But activists who are against abortion are energised by the changing landscape of the debate in the US.

As parliament sets to vote on two amendments on abortion laws this week and potentially pulls in one direction, activists will likely only get louder and become more effective at getting their message across.

Continue Reading

Trending