Leading voices call for the decriminalisation of women ending their own pregnancies
More than 30 organisations are urging parliament to remove the threat of criminal investigation and prosecution for women who end their own pregnancies in England and Wales.
A joint statement, signed by leading abortion care providers and institutions including the British Medical Association, Women’s Aid, and the Royal College of Gynaecologists, asks politicians to relook at the law to prevent women who are suspected of ending their own pregnancy outside of the legal abortion limits, from being criminally pursued.
Louise McCudden from abortion provider MSI
“We don’t believe abortion should be a crime,” Louise McCudden from abortion provider MSI, told Sky News.
“It’s healthcare, and it should be regulated the same as any other healthcare.”
Their proposals would bring English and Welsh law in line with Northern Ireland where abortion was fully decriminalised in 2020, and also countries including France and Canada.
Criminal inquiries can include investigating women who may have had premature labours or stillbirths, but who are suspected of trying to illegally terminate their pregnancy.
Sky News previously spoke to Sarah, whose baby was born prematurely and she was investigated for almost a year
It comes after a Sky News investigation last year revealed a rise in the number of people being investigated, and sometimes prosecuted, on suspicion of having so-called “illegal” abortions.
Between 2023 and 2024, 29 people in England and Wales were recorded as under police investigation on suspicion of “procuring an illegal abortion” or the “intentional destruction of a viable unborn child”.
That’s the highest number of police-recorded inquiries in over two decades.
Last year Sky News spoke to Sarah (not her real name). Her baby was born prematurely, at home.
He wasn’t breathing and so emergency services were called. Police turned up before paramedics, and Sarah said the house was like a “crime scene”.
She was investigated by police for nearly a year, with her phone and devices taken away.
Sarah had previously considered having an abortion – she went to a clinic but was over the legal gestation limit, and so searched online for pills but never bought any or went ahead.
Read more from Sky News:
UK records coldest January night in 15 years
Harry and Meghan visit LA fires evacuees
Soul Man singer Sam Moore dies
She says the trauma of being investigated for 51 weeks “never” left her mind, and that she was “made to feel like a criminal, like I’ve done something wrong to hurt my child”.
The police force involved told us they were alerted to the “potential sudden unexplained death of a baby” and so “attended to assist medical professionals”, adding that it was a “complex investigation” and that “unfortunately these kinds of enquiries take time”.
In England and Wales, it is a criminal offence to deliberately end a pregnancy. It carries a maximum sentence of life in prison.
Women can legally terminate a pregnancy in Great Britain, up to 24 weeks in an approved clinic, with the permission of two doctors.
They can have a surgical abortion or they can take two pills – known as a medical termination.
Having a termination outside of these circumstances in England and Wales is illegal under the 1861 Offences Against the Person Act.
Misoprostol is one of the two pills used in a medical abortion
Since COVID, the “pills by post” scheme became a permanent measure.
It means both sets of pills can be taken at home in the early stages of pregnancy. Some campaigners and medics point to this change as a factor that increased awareness among authorities about the ease of at-home abortions, leading to a rise in criminal investigations.
But others suggest that the law surrounding abortion in this country is sound, and any moves to liberalise it would be “worrying”.
Dr Calum Miller, a medical ethics professor at the University of Oxford
“We’re a pro-choice country, on the whole, most people think there should be legal abortion, but almost everyone thinks there should also be some limit,” said Dr Calum Miller, a medical ethics professor at the University of Oxford.
“We have some of the most extreme and liberal abortion laws already. In practice, you can get an abortion for any reason up to 24 weeks, or six months. This is compared to the European average of about 12 weeks,” he said.
Dr Miller suggests investigations are necessary to “protect children”.
“The inevitable side effect of having a law and protecting children is sometimes there will be investigations and sadly sometimes they result in a person being innocent, but that is what it means to protect children… if there is a serious reason to suspect violation of law, the reality is it does have to be investigated,” he said.
The National Police Chiefs’ Council and the Crown Prosecution Service say investigations are “rare” and “would only be initiated where there is credible information to suggest criminal activity… often as a result of concerns raised from medical professionals”.
A National Police Chiefs’ Council spokesperson told Sky News “unexpected pregnancy loss is not something which is routinely investigated by police as potential illegal abortion” and that they “recognise how traumatic the experience of losing a child is, with many complexities involved”.
They added that these cases come with “unique” factors and “personal circumstances” that are “carefully” considered.
The last blast furnaces left operating in Britain could see their fate sealed within days, after their Chinese owners took the decision to cut off the crucial supply of ingredients keeping them running.
Jingye, the owner of British Steel in Scunthorpe, has, according to union representatives, cancelled future orders for the iron ore, coal and other raw materials needed to keep the furnaces running.
The upshot is that they may have to close next month – even sooner than the earliest date suggested for its closure.
Read more: Thousands of jobs at risk as British Steel consults unions over closure
The fate of the blast furnaces – the last two domestic sources of virgin steel, made from iron ore rather than recycled – is likely to be determined in a matter of days, with the Department for Business and Trade now actively pondering nationalisation.
The upshot is that even as Britain contends with a trade war across the Atlantic, it is now working against the clock to secure the future of steelmaking at Scunthorpe.
The talks between the government and Jingye broke down last week after the Chinese company, which bought British Steel out of receivership in 2020, rejected a £500m offer of public money to replace the existing furnaces with electric arc furnaces.
The sum is the same one it offered to Tata Steel, which has shut down the other remaining UK blast furnaces in Port Talbot and is planning to build electric furnaces – which have far lower carbon emissions.
These steel workers could soon be out of work
However, the owners argue that the amount is too little to justify extra investment at Scunthorpe, and said last week they were now consulting on the date of shutting both the blast furnaces and the attached steelworks.
Since British Steel is the main provider of steel rails to Network Rail – as well as other construction steels available from only a few sites in the world – the closure would leave the UK more reliant on imports for critical infrastructure sites.
However, since the site belongs to its Chinese owners, a decision to nationalise the site would involve radical steps government officials are wary of taking.
They also fear leaving taxpayers exposed to a potentially loss-making business for the long run.
The dilemma has been heightened by the sharp turn in geopolitical sentiment following Donald Trump’s return to the White House.
The incipient trade war and threatened cut in American support to Europe have sparked fresh calls for countries to act urgently to secure their own supplies of critical materials, especially those used for defence and infrastructure.
Read more:
Car manufacturers fined £461m for collusion
There were no winners from Trump’s tariff gameshow
Gareth Stace, head of UK Steel, the industry lobby group, said: “Talks seem to have broken down between government and British Steel.
“My advice to government is: please, Jonathan Reynolds, Business Secretary, get back round that negotiating table, thrash out a deal, and if a deal can’t be found in the next few days, then I fear for the very future of the sector, but also here for Scunthorpe steelworks.”
British Steel declined to comment.
UK
Prince Andrew’s Pitch@Palace branded ‘crude attempt to enrich himself’ as Chinese spy documents set to be released
Prince Andrew’s efforts to make money from his Pitch@Palace project have been branded as a “crude attempt to enrich himself” at the expense of “unsuspecting tech founders”, as new documents may shed more light on what he and his team have been attempting to sell.
Today is the deadline for documents to be released relating to Prince Andrew‘s former senior adviser Dominic Hampshire and his interactions with the alleged Chinese spy Yang Tengbo.
In February, an immigration tribunal heard how the intelligence services had contacted Mr Hampshire about Mr Yang back in 2022. Mr Yang helped set up Pitch@Palace China, a branch of the duke’s scheme to help young entrepreneurs.
The alleged Chinese spy, Yang Tengbo, has links with Prince Andrew
Yang Tengbo. Pic: Pitch@Palace
Judges banned Mr Yang from the UK, saying his association with a senior royal had made Prince Andrew “vulnerable” and posed a threat to national security. Mr Yang challenged that decision at the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC).
Since that hearing, media organisations have applied for certain documents relating to the case and Mr Hampshire’s support for Mr Yang to be made public. SIAC agreed to release some information of public interest. It is hoped they may include more details on deals that he was trying to do on behalf of Prince Andrew.
So what do we know about potential deals for Pitch@Palace so far?
In February, Sky News confirmed that palace officials had a meeting last summer with tech funding company StartupBootcamp to discuss a potential tie-up between them and Prince Andrew relating to his Pitch@Palace project.
The palace wasn’t involved in the fine details of a deal but wanted guarantees to make sure it wouldn’t impact the Royal Family in the future. Sky News understands from one source that the price being discussed for Pitch was around £750,000 – there are, however, reports that a deal may have stalled.
Photos we found on the Chinese Chamber of Commerce website show an event held in Asia between StartupBootcamp and Innovate Global, believed to be an offshoot of Pitch.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Who is alleged Chinese spy, Yang Tengbo?
Documents, released in relation to the investigations into Mr Tengbo, have also shown how much the duke has always seen Pitch as a way of potentially making money. One document from 21 August 2021 clearly states “the duke needed money at the time, and saw the relationships with China through Pitch as one possible source of funding”.
But Prince Andrew’s apparent intention to use Pitch to make money has led to concerns about whether he is unfairly using the contacts and information he gained when he was a working royal.
Norman Baker, former MP and author of books on royal finances, believes it is “a crude attempt to enrich himself” and goes against what the tech entrepreneurs thought they were signing up for.
Read more:
Who is Yang Tenbo?
Virginia Giuffre says she has days to live
Emails between Andrew and Epstein revealed
He told Sky News: “The data given by these business people was given on the basis it was an official operation and not something for Prince Andrew, and so in my view, Prince Andrew had no right legally or morally to take the data which has been collected, a huge amount of data, and sell it…
“And quite clearly if you’re going to sell it off to StartupBootcamp, that is not what people had in mind. The entrepreneurs who joined Pitch@Palace did not do so to enrich Prince Andrew,” he said.
Rich Wilson was one tech entrepreneur who was approached at the start of Pitch@Palace to sign up, but he stepped away when he spotted a clause in the contract saying they’d be entitled to 2% equity in any funding he secured.
He feels Prince Andrew is continuing to use those he made a show of supporting.
He said: “It makes me feel sick. I think it’s terrible – that he is continuing to exploit unsuspecting tech founders in this way. A lot of them, I’m quite grey and old in the tooth now, I saw it coming, but clearly most didn’t. And a lot of them were quite young.
“It’ll be their first venture and you’re learning on the trot, so to speak. So to take advantage of people in such a major way – that’s an awful, sickening thing to do.”
We approached StartupBootcamp who said they had no comment to make, and the Duke of York’s office did not respond.
With reports that a deal may have stalled, it could be a big setback for the duke – especially with questions still about how he’ll continue to pay for his home on the Windsor estate now that the King no longer gives him financial support.
-
Sports2 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports12 months agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports1 year agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike
-
Business3 years agoBank of England’s extraordinary response to government policy is almost unthinkable | Ed Conway