MPs decry abortion as much as birth plans

The Deputy Chairman of the Conservative Party and the Father of the House have each expressed their strong concern in regards to the abortion as much as birth clause within the Crime and Policing Bill, which is about to change into law.

On Tuesday, during a House of Commons session on the Consideration of Lords amendments to the Crime and Policing Bill, Members of Parliament criticised Tonia Antoniazzi’s amendment, clause 208, which might change the law so it could now not be illegal for girls to perform their very own abortions for any reason, including sex-selective purposes, and at any point as much as and through birth, likely resulting in a big increase within the number of ladies performing dangerous late-term abortions at home.

The Father of the House, Sir Edward Leigh, criticised the abortion as much as birth clause together with an amendment that may pardon a lady who aborted her baby at 39 weeks, who was described by the judge as showing “no remorse” for her actions. 

Sir Edward stated that it was “a terrible indictment of our society that a human life might be taken when it’s about to be born, at 39 weeks, and that there ought to be a free pardon in such a serious case”.

Matt Vickers, the Deputy Chairman of the Conservative Party, stated that he, and lots of other people throughout the country, shared these concerns.

Vickers criticised how the amendment was added to the Bill after Committee Stage, meaning that it avoided much of the scrutiny that it could otherwise have been subjected to, and ensured that no evidence pertaining to it was given during evidence sessions. 

“Such a seismic change in the connection between the state and individuals must have had more scrutiny on this place”, he said.

Abortion as much as birth clause passed after lower than an hour of debate

On 17 June 2025, Labour MP Tonia Antoniazzi hijacked the Crime and Policing Bill (a Government Bill not related to abortion) to introduce clause 191 (now clause 208) to the Bill. This drastic change to the law was passed within the Commons after just 46 minutes of backbench debate – there was no prior consultation with the general public, no Committee Stage scrutiny and no evidence sessions.

Had this transformation been introduced as a standalone bill – the traditional route for major law changes – it could have received many hours of detailed Commons scrutiny, including a full Second Reading debate, line-by-line examination in Public Bill Committee, further consideration and amendments at Report Stage, and a concluding Third Reading debate.

The law change would likely result in the lives of many more women being endangered due to the risks involved with ‘DIY’ late-term abortions, and likewise tragically result in an increased variety of viable babies’ lives being ended well beyond the 24-week abortion closing date and beyond the purpose at which they’d have the ability to survive outside the womb.

Tonia Antoniazzi said in an interview that she was comfortable with women having the ability to abort a viable baby at 37 weeks.

Polling shows that 89% of the overall population and 91% of ladies agree that gender-selective abortion ought to be explicitly banned by the law – and only one% of ladies support introducing abortion as much as birth. 

Polling also shows that the general public ranked introducing abortion as much as birth at the underside of a listing of 20 possible priorities they need the UK Parliament to pursue over the subsequent 12 months, with only one in 50 people (2%) listing it as a priority.

Amendment to overturn abortion as much as birth clause rejected

On 18 March, Peers rejected amendment 424, which Baroness Monckton, together with other female Members of the House of Lords, tabled at Report Stage, that may have removed clause 208 from the Crime and Policing Bill. The amendment was rejected by Peers who voted 185 to 148 against it.

Speaking throughout the debate, Baroness Monckton said clause 208 “would allow moms to self-administer the abortion of their unborn child for any reason, at any stage of pregnancy, right as much as full term”. 

She argued that these proposals would have dangerous repercussions for the mental and physical health of ladies, and fatal consequences for innocent unborn children. 

Baroness Monckton took exception to the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists’ support for introducing this extreme change to the abortion law, saying that, of their reasoning, “the infant, who without the intervention of lethal drugs could be fully a living person at that stage, if born, is totally unmentioned. It is as if that is unmentionable”.

“Obviously, it’s deeply distressing, as we have now heard, for the mother to be questioned by the police within the aftermath of an illegal abortion. This ought to be done with compassion and sensitivity, however the police cannot act as if nothing has happened,” she continued.

Spokesperson for Right To Life UK, Catherine Robinson, said “I’m grateful to Sir Edward Leigh and Matt Vickers for reiterating the risks and injustices that the abortion as much as birth clause would bring about”.

“The clause should never have been allowed to pass. Such a big change within the law must have been brought through the right channels in Parliament, as a standalone piece of laws, not snuck in to a wider, unrelated Bill.”

© Right to Life UK