Nadine Dorries MP (Conservative, Mid Beds) complains about the ‘deluge of liberalising amendments’ proposed by various MPs.
Unfortunately, Ms Dorries is continuing in her wilful ignorance of, er, reality.
Let’s clear up a minor point. Dorries says
against the backdrop of statistics which show that we now have children aborting
That is a misleading sentence. The key word is ‘now’; this is nothing new. I showed (using clever sums and everything!) that there is no statistically significant rise in the number of abortions by people under sixteen. To say that ‘we now have children aborting’ suggests a recent change or, at any rate, a change. There is no evidence for that.
Moving on, the deluge is somewhat misleading. Below the fold you can find, by MP and date, all the amendments proposed by Evan Harris, John Bercow and Nadine Dorries to the HF&E Bill. Of the three MPs, Evan Harris has submitted the great bulk of the amendments. Very many of them deal with relatively technical details and the like; almost all deal with developments in fertilisation and embryology. No great surprise, there, as we are talking about the Human Fertilisation & Embryology Bill.
Ms Dorries has no comeback when people wish to amend the Bill to liberalise abortion; it was she who took the Bill beyond its original purposes with her amendments to restrict abortion.
I think the amendments tabled by both men amount to a form of legislative abuse of women. They display no care or attention to the effects of abortion on women and a complete disregard towards any moral direction of our young people.
I could, of course, say that the amendments tabled by Ms Dorries (her sex being largely irrelevant) amount to a form of legislative abuse of women by stripping them of rights over their own bodies. When Dorries talks about a lack of care and attention, I presume she is moving forward to this passage in her post:
His [Bercow’s] amendment seeks to criminalise any doctor of conscience who provides counselling or guidance to any woman seeking an abortion, with two years imprisonment.
Fortunately, it is such an outrageous amendment which would almost certainly result in the imprisonment of Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Sikh and Hindu GPs everywhere, that the Speaker is very unlikely to accept it.
I read it differently. I think it says that doctors should be doctors, not proselytisers. If (say) a Jehovah’s Witness were to become a surgeon, would we allow them to refuse to administer blood transfusions? If a member of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster were to become a psychiatrist, would we allow them to Talk Like a Pirate on September 19th? As I and Unity have said before, Dorries’ arguments about absolute religious objections to abortion are weak.
If we are allowed a debate on restricting abortion, I don’t see why we shouldn’t have one on liberalising abortion. I’d add that liberalising abortion doesn’t necessarily mean raising the twenty-four week limit; it can mean making it easier to have an abortion up to (say) fourteen weeks.
xD.
Amendments submitted by Dorries
NC3
To move the following Clause:—
‘In section 1(1)(a) of the Abortion Act 1967 (c. 87) (medical termination of pregnancy), for “twenty-fourth week” substitute “sixteenth week”.’.
NC5
To move the following Clause:—
‘In section 1(1)(a) of the Abortion Act 1967 (c. 87) (medical termination of pregnancy), for “twenty-fourth week” substitute “twentieth week”.’.
NC6
To move the following Clause:—
‘(1) The Abortion Act 1967 (c. 87) is amended as follows.
(2) After section 1(1)(d) insert—
“( ) In section 1(1)(d) the term “seriously handicapped” does not include club foot, cleft lip, cleft palate or cleft lip and palate”’.
Amendments submitted by Bercow
NC11
To move the following Clause:—
‘(1) The Abortion Act 1967 (c. 87) is amended as follows.
(2) After section 4 insert—
“Prohibition of deliberately misleading advertising
(1) It shall be an offence to deliberately mislead through advertising in relation to the termination of pregnancy and alternatives thereto.
(2) Any person, association or body corporate shall be guilty of an offence under subsection (1) if—
(a) they provide information or advice, whether for reward or otherwise, to a pregnant woman about termination of pregnancy or the alternatives thereto, and
(b) they advertise the services they provide under paragraph (a) through material which—
(i) contains false information and is untruthful in relation to any of the matters in subsection (3), or
(ii) in its overall presentation deceives or is in any way likely to deceive the average person in relation to any of the matters in that subsection, even if the information is factually correct; and
(c) the material under paragraph (b) causes or is likely to cause the average pregnant woman to take a decision in relation to the termination of her pregnancy she would not have taken otherwise.
(3) The matters referred to in subsection (2)(b) are—
(a) that the person, association or body corporate concerned—
(i) provides services authorised under this Act, or
(ii) provides information about how to obtain services authorised under this Act, when it does not provide such services or such information.
(b) information about how to obtain services authorised under this Act.
(4) A person guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable—
(a) on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum; or
(b) on conviction on indictment, to a fine or imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years or both.”’.
Amendments submitted by Harris
31
Clause 11, page 8, line 21, leave out subsection (1) and insert—
‘(1) Section 11 of the 1990 Act (licences for treatment, storage and research) is amended as follows—
(a) in the title, for “and research” substitute “, research and therapy”.
(b) in subsection (1)(b), for “and embryos” substitute “, embryos or human admixed embryos”; and
(c) after subsection (1)(c) add—
“(d) licences under paragraph 3B of that Schedule authorising activities for the purposes of therapy”.’.
24
Schedule 2, page 55, line 14, leave out from ‘a’ to ‘that’ in line 15 and insert ‘harmful gene, combination of genes, chromosome or mitochondrion’.
25
Schedule 2, page 55, line 18, leave out from ‘any’ to ‘establishing’ in line 19 and insert ‘harmful gene, combination of genes, chromosome or mitochondrion’.
26
Schedule 2, page 55, line 19, leave out second ‘abnormality’ and insert ‘genotype’.
27
Schedule 2, page 55, line 20, leave out from ‘other’ to end of line 21 and insert ‘harmful gene, combination of genes, chromosome or mitochondrion’.
28
Schedule 2, page 55, line 45, leave out ‘abnormality’ and insert ‘harmful genotype’.
29
Schedule 2, page 56, line 1, leave out ‘abnormality’ and insert ‘harmful gene, combination of genes, chromosomes or mitochondrion’.
30
Schedule 2, page 56, line 3, leave out ‘abnormality’ and insert ‘harmful genotype’.
32
Schedule 2, page 59, line 6, at end add—
‘Licences for therapy
3B
(1) A licence under this paragraph may authorise any of the following—
(a) bringing about the creation of embryos in vitro, and
(b) keeping or using embryos, for the purposes of therapy specified in the licence.
(2) Subject to the provisions of this Act, a licence under this paragraph may be granted subject to such conditions as may be specified in the licence.
(3) A licence under this paragraph may authorise the performance of any of the activities referred to in sub-paragraph (1) in such a manner as may be so specified.
(4) A licence under this paragraph may be granted for such period not exceeding three years as may be specified in the licence.
(5) This paragraph has effect subject to pargraph 3C. Purposes for which activities may be licensed under pargraph 3B
3C
(1) a licence under paragraph 3B cannot authorise any activity unless the activity appears to the Authority—
(a) to be necessary or desirable for any of the purposes of developing or deriving treatments for serious disease or other serious medical conditions, or
(b) to be necessary or desirable for such other purposes as may be specified in regulations.’.
118
Clause 3, page 3, line 24, at end insert—
‘(5A)
Regulations may provide that—
(a) an egg can be a permitted egg, or
(b) a sperm can be a permitted sperm, even though the egg or sperm has been developed from one or more human cells in a prescribed process designed to treat infertility.
(5B)
Regulations under subsection (5A) may—
(a) provide that any sperm be developed from one or more cells of a genetic male and any egg be derived from one or more cells of a genetic female.
(b) specify, or otherwise restrict, the nature of the infertility which the prescribed process is intended to treat.’.
9
Schedule 3, page 65, line 7, at end insert—
‘Cases where consent not required for storage and use for research
12A(1)
The human cells of a person (“the donor”) may be used to bring about the creation of an embryo or a human admixed embryo in vitro; and any embryo or human admixed embryo so created may be used or stored for the purposes of any project of research without the donor’s consent if the following conditions are met.
(2)
Condition A is that the human cells are lawfully taken from or provided by the donor.
(3)
Condition B is that the human cells were first stored or used prior to the day on which Schedule 3 to the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008 comes into force.
(4) Condition C is that the human cells, embryos or human admixed embryos are used in circumstances such that the person carrying out the research (“the researcher”) is not in possession, and not likely to come into possession, of information from which the donor can be identified.
(5)
Condition D is that it is not reasonably possible to contact the donor to obtain their consent.
(6)
Condition E is that there are resonable grounds for believing that research of comparable effectiveness cannot be carried out if the project of research for which the human cells, embryos or human admixed embryos are stored or used has to be confined to, or relate only to, material in relation to which there is an effective consent.
(7) Condition F is that it does not appear to the researcher that the donor has indicated any objection to such use or storage (as applicable).’.
10
Schedule 3, page 65, line 7, at end insert—
‘Consent in relation to children for storage and use for research
12A(1) The human cells of a person (“the child”) may be used to bring about the creation of an embryo or inter-species embryo in vitro, and any embryo or inter-species embryo so created, used or stored for the purposes of any project of research without the child’s consent if the following conditions are met.
(2) Condition A is that the human cells are lawfully taken from or provided by the child before the child attains the age of 18 years.
150
Clause 25, page 27, line 27, at end insert—
‘(v) the disclosure is made in order to ensure the safety of medical treatment which the patient is to receive outside of licensed premises.’.
151
Clause 25, page 27, line 27, at end insert—
‘(v) the disclosure is made, on clinical grounds, as part of the patient’s medical care, to a practitioner who is bound by the ordinary duty of patient confidentiality.’.
173
Clause 29, page 33, line 20, at end insert—
‘(10B)
It is a defence for a person (“the defendant”) charged with an offence of doing anything which, under section 3(1) or (1A), 4(1)(a) or 4A(2), cannot be done other than in pursuance of a licence, to prove that at the material time the defendant believed on reasonable grounds that what they did was not something to which the Act applied.’.
119
Clause 30, page 34, line 12, at end insert ‘section 3ZA(5A)’.
174
Clause 30, page 34, line 14, at end insert ‘section 20A; section 20B;’.
171
Clause 35, page 36, line 19, after ‘then’, insert ‘unless W is a surrogate mother within the meaning of section 1(2) of the Surrogacy Arrangements Act 1985 and’.
172
Clause 42, page 40, line 4, after ‘then’, insert ‘unless W is a surrogate mother within the meaning of section 1(2) of the Surrogacy Arrangements Act 1985’.
161
Clause 54, page 45, line 41, leave out ‘made by two people (“the applicants”)’.
162
Clause 54, page 45, line 42, after second ‘the’, insert ‘applicant or’.
163
Clause 54, page 46, line 1, after ‘not’, insert ‘the applicant or’.
164
Clause 54, page 46, line 4, after first ‘of’, insert ‘the applicant or’.
165
Clause 54, page 46, line 7, leave out subsection (2) and insert—
‘(2A)
An application for a parental order may by made by—
(a) a couple or
(b) one person who is not married or a civil partner.
(2B)
In this section, a couple means—
(a) a married couple or
(b) civil partners or
(c) two people (whether of different sexes or the same sex) who are living together in an enduring family relationship and who are not within the prohibited degrees of relationship to each other.
(2C)
A parental order may be made on the application of one person who is married or is a civil partner if the court is satisfied—
(a) that the person’s spouse or civil partner cannot be found,
(b) the spouses or civil partners have separated and are living apart and the separation is likely to be permanent, or
(c) the person’s spouse or partner is by reason of ill health, whether physical or mental, incapable of making an application for a parental order.’.
166
Clause 54, page 46, line 13, after first ‘the’, insert ‘applicant or’.
167
Clause 54, page 46, line 17, after second ‘the’, insert ‘applicant or’.
168
Clause 54, page 46, line 18, after ‘applicants’, insert ‘(or in the case of a single person, the applicant)’.
169
Clause 54, page 46, line 20, after ‘applicants’, insert ‘(or in the case of a single person, the applicant)’.
170
Clause 54, page 47, line 10, after ‘by’, insert ‘a single person or by’.
NC1
To move the following Clause:—
‘(1)
The Abortion Act 1967 (c.87) is amended as follows.
(2)
In section 1(1) omit from first “if” to end of paragraph (1) and insert—
“a registered medical practitioner is of the opinion, formed in good faith—
(a) that the pregnancy has not exceeded its twenty-fourth week and that the termination would be carried out in accordance with the conditions and principles of good medical practice, or
(b) that one or more of the following grounds applies—
(i) the termination is necessary to prevent grave permanent injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman; or
(ii) the continuance of the pregnancy would involve risk to the life of the pregnant woman, greater than if the pregnancy were terminated; or
(iii) there is a substantial risk that if the child were born it would suffer from such physical or mental abnormalities as to be seriously handicapped.” ’.
NC2
To move the following Clause:—
‘(1) The Abortion Act 1967 (c.87) is amended as follows.
(2) In section 1(1) for first “medical” substitute “health care”.
-
In section 6, after “them:—” insert “ “registered health care practitioner” means a “registered medical practitioner” as defined in Schedule 1 to the Interpretation Act 1978 (c.30) or a nurse or midwife registered in the register maintained under article 5 of the Nursing and Midwifery Order 2001 by virtue of qualifications in nursing or midwifery, as the case may be.” ’.
NC12
To move the following Clause:—
‘(1) The Abortion Act 1967 (c. 87) is amended as follows.
(2) After section 4(1) insert—
“(1A)
For the avoidance of doubt, subsection (1) shall not apply to the provision, prescription, dispensing or administration of emergency hormonal contraception or any other form of contraception by a registered health care practitioner or registered pharmacist except where otherwise specified in statute.
(3) In section 6, after “them:—, insert—
““registered pharmacist” means a registered pharmacist as defined under Schedule 1 of the Interpretation Act 1978 (c. 30).”’.
NC13
To move the following Clause:—
‘(1) The Abortion Act 1967 (c. 87) is amended as follows.
(2) In section 1(4) for “two registered medical practitioners,” substitute “a registered medical practitioner”.
(3) In section 2(1)(a) omit “practitioners or”’.