Introduction: 

This essay will delve into the legislative, judicial and ethical influences on the concept  of abortion and its legality within the UK framework. Statutory legislation such as the  advancements made from the Offences Against the Person Act (OAPA) in the current Abortion  Act have been essential to the lives of individuals seeking abortion services and so it is  important to consider how the law has coped with these demands.[1][2]It is worth examining how  frameworks from other countries, like Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, have 

tackled the legality of abortion and whether or not advancements have been made to improve  the approach to abortion services within these countries. It would withal be necessary to look  at various viewpoints on the matter, including the influence of various ethics, such as  consequentialism, on the legality of abortion in relation to the beginning of life, including the  impact that religion used to have in the UK in contrast to that of Arabian countries, on the  moulding of the law. In light of such matters, this essay will aim to take a neutral approach to  look at the validity and progressiveness of ethics. For the purposes of this essay, ‘progressive’  will be defined as an approach taken through frameworks to make abortion services more  accessible to those inclined to use them, ideally to allow a person the autonomy to choose  themselves whether or not they want to follow through with the procedure for the

benefit of  their health, mental and/or physical, as well as the health of the embryo/foetus. Finally, this  essay will examine how progressive the UK framework is in relation to abortion laws and  where, in history, development has occurred to current affairs. 

Is the Abortion Act enough? 

It is known that there are complications within the UK framework surrounding the  approach to abortion services and how accessible they are to women. From 1861 abortion was  criminalised,[3] even in cases of rape and foetal abnormality, but history has shown a  development in making abortion more accessible to those who need it. In 1929, the defence for  carrying out an abortion was created under the Infant Life (Preservation) Act for the purpose  of preserving the life of the mother,[4] however if the person in question were to terminate past the stage of twenty eight weeks then they would be in violation, having “primâ facie proof that  they were, at that time pregnant of a child capable of being born alive” creating pressure on the  individual to get services in what would be considered a timely manner.[5] The Act of performing  a termination on an embryo/foetus was initially legalised for the UK under medical supervision  in the Abortion Act of 1967.[6] The Act “created exemptions to the Offences Against the Person  Act,[7] which is “still on the statute books and makes abortion a crime punishable by life in  prison”.[8] The Offences Against the Person Act is still legally enforceable,[9] abortion is considered a crime if carried out independently or if operating from a medical professional is  unauthorised, making the act punishable if unapproved by at least two medical professionals.[10]

If abortion is still not considered a statutory right, then the legislative cannot be wholly progressive within the scope of abortion laws. Although the Abortion Act allows a person to at least have the choice of the procedure if necessary under the provisions of the Act,[11] it is only to a degree that is deemed acceptable through the exceptions of said provisions and is, in nature, not entirely then a choice given beyond the six-month limit. These restrictions to a person’s right to choose creates a blockage for progression, as consequently, an individual is unlawful in getting an abortion after this time period. This raises the issue of whether legislation within the UK requires a reform to allow for, albeit under specific circumstances. It therefore is worth considering whether a reform of the current legislation is necessary to examine the extent to which abortion is regulated to consider the views of those arguing that the right to choose  should be enough, especially considering opposing anti-abortion rhetoric that influences this  regulation. 

Northern Ireland’s approach: 

Unlike other UK legislations, “The 1967 Act does not apply in Northern Ireland, where  it has since adopted different legislation on the matter: abortion remained unlawful under the  1861 Offences Against the Person Act,[12]qualified by the 1945 Criminal Justice (Northern  Ireland) Act,[13] which permits the abortion of a ‘child capable of being born alive’ only where  the mother’s life would otherwise be at risk.”[14] Before the introduction of the Abortion  (Northern Ireland) Regulations,[15] common law through the UK’s judicial system proved to 

complicate matters between the UK and Northern Irish laws. In the case of R (A & B) v  Secretary of State for Health a woman from Northern Ireland was denied access to free NHS  services for an abortion in England on the grounds that the National Health Service could not  provide free service to Northern Ireland citizens.[16][17] In the Supreme Court judgement, a  three: two majority decided against the appeal, stating that the secretary of state for health was  not acting irrationally or unlawfully in refusing to exercise his power to provide free abortion services to women from Northern Ireland in the same way that they were provided to women  from England. In the dissenting judgement of Lord Kerr, it is mentioned that the case in question has problems relating to English Law, questioning the integrity of the UK legal  framework, “[a] woman from Northern Ireland visiting England who suffers an acute attack of  appendicitis will have, if it proves necessary, her appendix removed in a National Health  Service (NHS) hospital, without charge.” In relation to the right to life,[18] it’s left to be seen that  to deprive a woman access to abortion services in the same capacity, would be in breach of  this, and so by addressing abortion laws within the UK framework in this light, we can see that  there an opportunity to repeal the National Health Service Act to occupy citizens in need from  other countries.[19] Statistics exemplify this, an estimate of around 1,000 women travel from the  region to England yearly for such services to avoid criminal liability.[20] Lord Kerr’s judgement  touches on the difficulties that women face in this aspect and so without examining with  legislature from Northern Ireland, it might be useful to tackle this issue by examining the scope  of abortion service use within the NHS. As a result of these issues, the Minister for Women &  Equalities stated, in their letter to members of parliament regarding additional funding to  provide Northern Irish women with aid for abortion services on the NHS, “This is clearly a  sensitive issue and one which has direct implications for equality in treatment of women from  Northern Ireland… no English health service user is disadvantaged as a result of this change”.[21] This response shows that departments working within the UK framework are making  progressive movements towards the accessibility of abortion services, even without changes to  the legislature. This shows that perhaps there might not be a need to even consider need repeal to the Abortion Act or National Health Service Act to achieve further autonomy,[22]^[23] as  institutions can provide further support within their own frameworks. 

A demand for access 

Doctor Sandy Goldbeck-Wood provides her view on the matter of abortion services in  reflection to her personal experience with patients, “Abortion should be offered through a  reflective process. We will not achieve this by criminalising abortion, overpowering women’s  autonomy over their bodies… we need structures and processes which support shared  conscientious reflection”.[24] Reflective processes suggest doctors can recommend to their  patients the best course of action to avoid situations like these. “Risk management processes  will analyse the event and make recommendations that should reduce the risk of such an event  recurring”,[25] meaning they could recommend medications such as contraception if the patient  is not ready for a child to avoid the later use of abortion services if necessary. These regulations help with the progression of abortion services in the UK. 

It would be worth looking into the effectiveness of the legal frameworks in the Republic of Ireland on abortion as a comparative to that of the UK framework. Many Irish women would seek abortion services in England to avoid criminal liability, a rough estimate of 3,265 yearly as of 2016,[26] the highest rate from any other country. The demand for abortion services ended in a change in legislation, in 2018 a national referendum was held which later legalised abortion through what would become the Health (Regulation of Termination of Pregnancy) Act.[27] The result of which shows strong progression for the framework of the Republic of Ireland, as it  became the first country to legalise abortion by a popular referendum rather than through  legislative change or courts’ ruling. Although the Act legalised abortion, the provisions are stricter than what we have within the Abortion Act,[28] requiring a twelve-week-limit on abortion for pregnancies with special exceptions extending to twenty-four-weeks compared with the 

standard twenty-four-week limit in the UK. In 2007, statistics retrieved from the Science and Technology Committee found, “WHO estimates that 68,000 women worldwide die each year  due to complications of unsafe abortions”.[29]Exemplifying the ineffectiveness of abortion bans  in other countries, it is evident that women who pursue abortion services for medical or  emergency purposes in other countries have been unsuccessful and in turn have resorted to  unsafe methods. In contrast to the progression of the legalisation of abortion in Ireland, the UK  framework has made vast progressions in legislation to provide accessible abortion service by  considering the reasonable implications that individuals might have and giving a more  generous period of six months and even longer in more serious cases. Respectively, Northern Ireland have since introduced their own regulations, allowing individuals to access abortion  services but only up to 12 weeks of gestation,[30] demonstrating that there is still some way to  go before abortions rights develop to the extent of other UK countries. 

The influence of ethics 

In the judgement of R v Instan, Lord Chief Justice Coleridge stated that “it would not be correct to say that every moral obligation involves a legal duty; but every legal duty is  founded on a moral obligation.”[31] Although an outdated case, the persuasive authority within  the judgement here demonstrates the difficulties of medical law today in that ethics has a heavy  influence on the operation of issues such as abortion and consequently creates a struggle for  the UK framework to make advancements in the law. The earliest form of medical ethics comes in Greek medical text with the Hippocratic Oath,[32]which provides guidelines for medical professionals in the approach to treating patients – “a doctor is therefore there for the benefit of his patients”.[33]In regards to modern medicine, the Oath is still the foundation of the approach that practitioners take, however, with the emergence of bioethics – the study of ethical issues as a result of advancements through biology and medicine,[34]there has been greater controversy  surrounding the legality of abortion. 

Legally and ethically there will always be dispute about where life officially begins, questioning when the foetus is considered alive or to have the same legal value to that of a person. The distinction of the ethical value of an existing person to that of a potential future  person is an argument that varies dependant on one’s ethical views.[35] The law perceives that a  foetus begins its legal ‘life’ at twenty-four weeks of gestation from conception,[36] amending the  provisions of the Infant Life (Preservation) Act from twenty-eight weeks,[37] and so to perform  termination on an embryo/foetus before this time would be legal. According to the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists there have been successful interventions by professionals at twenty-two-twenty-four weeks for premature babies which has led to improved survival rates and in this regard, it would be recommended that this time limit for abortion remain.[38] The use of biological research has therefore aided the legislative framework in deciding where to draw the line with the use of abortion services. It creates an increasingly progressive society in the UK where termination is permitted on reasonable grounds for both mother and embryo/foetus regardless of one’s personal views on the matter. The Convention  on Human Rights and Biomedicine states that “Parties to this Convention shall protect the  dignity and identity of all human beings and guarantee everyone, without discrimination,  respect for their integrity and other rights and fundamental freedoms with regard to the  application of biology and medicine”.[39] The legislative is “morally bound to take the ethical  view of consequentialism”,[40] where the judgment of one’s actions can only be assessed based  on the result of said action’s, and so if an individual, in proceeding with termination, is abiding  by the law then legally they are not culpable of criminal activity. This advancement has, therefore, provided individuals with the freedom to access abortion services for their health and personal reasons despite the time restrictions set out in the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act,[41]which aims to protect the life of the potential human. In this manner, the legislature is protecting the rights of both the individual and the potential human. 

A decrease in the religious influence 

It would also be important to consider the implications of religious practices such as  Christianity. In tradition “values are translated into practical rules in the shape of an antipathy to euthanasia and abortion”,[42] and so in this respect Christianity ideologies would seek to prevent abortion altogether, in the belief that “humanity is a gift and cannot be disposed of by mortals and so they would seek to prevent abortion in any capacity”.[43] Moreover, Christianity holds a belief that “various forms of intervention in human reproduction is morally wrong”,[44] meaning that alternative methods of preventing pregnancy to avoid using abortion services through methods of contraception would be taboo. Christianity, in history, has been a popular practice within the UK in regulating the law as shown from the origins of the Church of England in the 1530’s, from which point “over the next 150 years legislation established and protected the Church”.[45]However, in the contemporary UK framework we can see a dramatic decline from these ideals within the law. In contrast, contemporary eastern countries adopt laws that stem from religious views. Namely, Arabian countries are regulated by Islamic views similarly to how Christianity once affected the UK framework. Abortion is only deemed acceptable if the alternative would result in the death of the mother. Many Muslims believe that the mother is the “original source of life”, while the embryo/foetus is only “potential” life.[46]

Research shows that in Islamic law,[47] abortion is not permissible at twelve weeks of gestations when the foetus “has a soul”, exemplifying another religious viewpoint that restricts the choice for abortion. Due to these laws, women would not be able to use abortion services after a period of three months, making it more difficult for them with stricter time constraints. In addition, there are less grounds on which abortion is permissible including rape or foetal abnormality, and so the right to abortion is hardly evident in Islamic law, showing that are is a greater need for progression within those frameworks. In contrast, the law within the UK has since shaped  a society that has become increasingly more progressive towards the acceptance of abortion,  and this has clearly been evident through the legislative framework with the implementation of  the Abortion Act,[48] suggesting a contrast between the influence of more modern ethical views  like consequentialism (enforcing the ideology of autonomy) and the decrease in influence from  religion on the UK framework. 

The principle of autonomy follows the guidelines spoken, suggesting self-governance over one’s actions and decisions. This principle defines the ethical manners in which the legality of abortion has been handled to date, as proved earlier. However, in some medical instances including abortion, individuals may experience trouble in their capacity to consent.  An individual must be “found to be competent to make a valid refusal of consent to medical treatment” otherwise a decision must be made on their behalf by medical professionals,[49] exemplifying why “capacity to decide is not an absolute concept.”[50] In this sense, autonomy  is an ideal that isn’t always practically realised, the law cannot be entirely progressive, but it  can to a degree. In light of the developments shown through the UK framework, ethics and law must ultimately compromise on the matter of abortion. The autonomy of an individual is of paramount importance, but it is evident that in the case of considering abortion “termination of pregnancy becomes less acceptable as fetal maturity increases”.[51] Inevitably, there will be a point where the foetus becomes as valued as a born human through the eyes of statute law and therefore the law demands that another life must be taken into consideration. 

Conclusion 

UK legal frameworks, to a vast degree, can be justified as having progressive abortion laws to date. Regulating abortion law carries with it the weight of ethical views, which has evidently carried difficulties in law because there is no clear ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ answers to just what the law should aim to achieve. To satisfy this, the UK framework has compromised with its legislation and through professional practices in allowing for women to access abortion services in matters of need or emergency as well as accommodating non-English NHS users. Neighbouring countries like the Republic of Ireland have also made developments in light of these factors, demonstrating that legal frameworks are becoming increasingly progressive in their laws alongside the UK. With the reduction of the religious influence and reasonable consideration of ethical views, the framework has managed to make itself more progressive in accessing abortion and protecting the lives of individuals. In addition, there has been consideration for the life of a potential foetus to balance the legality of abortion, by considering when the foetus would consider to be ‘alive’. It’s important to establish the effect that religion once had in England on preventing the progression of abortion laws, and the effect it still has in eastern societies. The contrast in contemporary society shows us that religion has heavy impacts on the progression of the law and so the UK can be seen as progressive especially in comparison to other frameworks because it no longer accommodates religious influence. In light of these factors it is clear that through these developments, the UK framework has made exponential progress in regulating abortion laws and can rightly be characterised as progressive.

References:

• [1] Offences Against the Person Act (OAPA) 1861. 
• [2] Abortion Act 1967. 
• [3] OAPA 1861 section 58. 
• [4] 1929 section (1)(1). 
• [5] Ibid, section (1)(2).
• [6] Abortion Act 1967. 
• [7] OAPA 1861, s.58,59.
• [8] Richard Hurley, ‘End criminal sanctions for abortion’ [2017].
• [9] OAPA 1861. 
• [10] Gov UK, ‘Abortion notification forms for England and Wales’ (Gov UK, 1991). 
• https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/204071/HSA1 -form.pdf accessed 14 January 2024 
• [11] Abortion Act s.1(a)(b)(c)(d).
• [12] OAPA 1861. 
• [13] Criminal Justice (Northern Ireland) Act 1945. 
• [14] Sally Howard, ‘After 50 years of legal abortion in Great Britain, calls grow for further liberalisation’ [2017]
• [15] 2020.
• [16] [2017] UKSC 41.
• [17] National Health Service Act 2006.
• [18] Human Rights Act 1998, Article 2.
• [19] National Health Service Act 2006.
• [20] Gov UK, ‘Abortion Statistics: England and Wales; (Gov UK, 2019). 
• https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/808556/Abort ion_Statistics__England_and_Wales_2018__1_.pdf accessed 14 January 2024.
• [21] Government Equalities Office, ‘Letter from Justine Greening on Abortion in England.’ (Government  Equalities Office, 2017). 
• https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a82112040f0b6230269aa84/Letter_from_Justine_Greening_on_Abortion_in_England.pdf accessed 14 January 2024
• [22] Abortion Act 1967. 
• [23] National Health Service Act 2006. 
• [24] Sandy Goldbeck-Wood, ‘Reflection is protection in abortion care’ [2017].
• [25] Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists ‘Reflective Practise’ (Royal College of Obstetricians and  Gynaecologists, 2024). https://www.rcog.org.uk/globalassets/documents/careers-and-training/core-curriculum pre-august-2013/ed-reflective-prac.pdf accessed 14 January 2024
• [26] Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists ‘Reflective Practise’ (Royal College of Obstetricians and  Gynaecologists, 2024). https://www.rcog.org.uk/globalassets/documents/careers-and-training/core-curriculum pre-august-2013/ed-reflective-prac.pdf accessed 14 January 2024 
• [27] 2018.
• [28] 1967. 
• [29] House of Commons, Science and Technology Committee, ‘Scientific Developments Relating to the Abortion Act 1967’ (2006-07) page 50. 
• [30] Abortion (Northern Ireland) Regulations 2020. 
• [31] R v Instan [1893] 1 QB 453.
• [32] Hippocrates of Cos, The Oath (1923) 298-299. 
• [33] Laurie G, Harmon S, Dove E, Mason and McCall Smiths’ Law and Medical Ethics (published in 2019, 11^th edn, Oxford University Press) 3. 
• [34] Ibid. 
• [35] Richard Mervyn Hare ‘Abortion and the Golden Rule’ [1975] 212-213. 
• [36] Human Fertilization and Embryology Act 1990 s 37(1). 
• [37] 1929. 
• [38] Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, ‘Q&A: The abortion time limit’ (Royal College of  Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, 2024). https://www.rcog.org.uk/en/news/campaigns-and-opinions/human fertilisation-and-embryology-bill/qa-the-abortion-time-limit/ accessed 14 January 2024
• [39] 1997, Article 1. 
• [40] Peter Lloyd, ‘Which beings should be given rights?’ (Philosophy Now, 1991). 
• https://philosophynow.org/issues/3/Which_Beings_Should_Be_Given_Rights accessed 14 January 2024 ⁴¹ 1990. 
• [41] 1990. 
• [42] Laurie G, Harmon S, Dove E, Mason and McCall Smiths’ Law and Medical Ethics (published in 2019, 11^th edn, Oxford University Press) 4. 
• [43] Ibid.
• [44] Ibid. 
• [45] Parliament.UK, ‘Parliament, Church and Religion’ (UK Parliament, 2024). 
• https://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/transformingsociety/private-lives/religion/overview/church and-religion/ accessed 14 January 2024 
• [46] Donna Lee Bowan, Contemporary Muslim Ethics of Abortion (published in 2003, University of South Carolina  Press) 64. 
• [47] BBC, ‘religions – abortions – the soul’ (BBC, 2009). 
• http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/islam/islamethics/abortion_1.shtml accessed 14 January 2024
• [48] 1967. 
• [49] John Coggon, ‘English Law: Justifiable Inconsistency or Blinkered Moralism?’ [2007].
• [50] Ibid. 
• [51] Laurie G, Harmon S, Dove E, Mason and McCall Smiths’ Law and Medical Ethics (published in 2019, 11^th edn, Oxford University Press) 291.