UK House of Lords votes for abortion decriminalisation
In a troubling development for abortion law in England and Wales, the House of Lords has rejected amendments aiming to remove or alter Clause 208 of the Crime and Policing Bill during its Report Stage on March 18th. This clause removes criminal liability for women concerning self-induced abortion at any gestational age, i.e., up until birth.
Peers voted 185 to 148 against Amendment 424 (moved by Baroness Rosa Monckton), which would have entirely deleted Clause 208. A separate amendment proposed by Baroness Philippa Stroud, aiming to reinstate mandatory in-person consultations with a medical professional before prescribing abortion pills (linked to the “pills-by-post” scheme for early medical abortions), was rejected 191 to 119.
If the Bill receives Royal Assent in its current form, women in England and Wales will no longer face investigation, arrest, prosecution, or imprisonment for self-inducing an abortion at any stage up until birth. Clause 208 originated as New Clause 1 (NC1), tabled by Labour MP Tonia Antoniazzi, and passed the House of Commons on 17 June 2025 (379–137), after a limited debate time of around 46 minutes.
Proponents of this amendment argue it shields vulnerable women from criminalisation in difficult situations, such as late-discovered pregnancies, coercion, or barriers to NHS access. Pro-life groups, including Right To Life UK, argue that the change removes important deterrents against late self-managed abortions (e.g., using pills obtained remotely or illicitly beyond the approved 24-week limit in the UK), which could increase risks to women and enable actions like sex-selective terminations without accountability or criminal consequences for the woman.
Spokesperson for Right to Life UK, Catherine Robinson, stated (aligning with her post-vote comments): “Tonight’s vote means there will be no criminal deterrent against a woman inducing her own abortion right up to full term for any reason, including sex-selective ones. A civilised society should not permit such outcomes without safeguards. There is no widespread public demand for this specific change, and it was not part of the Government’s manifesto. Annually, abortions in England and Wales already exceed 300,000, with the 24-week limit higher than in many EU countries (where 12 weeks is common on request). Yet Parliament has moved towards fewer criminal safeguards in self-managed cases, even late in pregnancy. The abortion lobby supports decriminalisation partly to address issues from the pills-by-post scheme, but critics say removing in-person consultations endangers women by missing coercion, incorrect gestational dating, or health risks in late self-administration.”
The pills-by-post scheme (telemedicine for early medical abortions up to 10 weeks) was introduced temporarily during the pandemic and became permanent in 2022. While medical organisations such as the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG) regard it as safe and effective. Critics highlight potential risks associated with self-reported gestation or the absence of physical examinations.
Surveys commissioned by pro-life groups show strong opposition to sex-selective abortions (around 89% favouring explicit bans) and low support for unrestricted late-term abortion (often in the low single digits). Independent polls indicate broad support for the existing 24-week clinical limit with exceptions, mixed views on full decriminalisation, and limited public awareness of current criminal risks to women.
Medical organisations such as the RCOG, BMA, and pro-choice groups support the change, viewing it as protecting vulnerable women from criminal laws while preserving clinical regulations and safeguards. This reform applies only to England and Wales, where the Bill is expected to become law in the coming weeks or months.
What happens in the UK rarely stays there. New Zealand decriminalised abortion in 2020, allowing terminations up to 20 weeks on request and beyond in certain cases. Our abortion numbers have risen sharply (by around 37% from pre-law figures, reaching over 17,700 in 2024), coinciding with expanded telehealth access. The same ideological momentum that propelled Clause 208 through Westminster is already echoing in policy discussions here in New Zealand.
This vote serves as a stark and urgent reminder of how incremental legislative changes erode protections for the unborn, paving the way for more extreme outcomes that prioritise convenience over the fundamental right to life.
Pro-life organisations and advocates must act with renewed urgency: Raise awareness relentlessly, mobilise communities, support vulnerable women facing crisis pregnancies, lobby and fight at every level to defend the dignity and right to life of both the mother and unborn child.
*Written by Family First staff writers*
