Memorandum 19
Submission from the All-Party Parliamentary
Pro-Choice and Sexual Health Group, submitted by Baroness Gould
of Potternewton
I am writing on behalf of the All-Party Parliamentary
Pro-Choice and Sexual Health Group, which is a registered cross
party group, established in 2004. The purpose of the Group is
to raise awareness in Parliament of the needs of women seeking
abortion and the importance of improving all aspects of sexual
health for women and men in the UK.
The All-Party Parliamentary Pro-Choice and Sexual
Health Group works closely with fpa and the Faculty for Family
Planning and Reproductive Health Care. The Group supports the
evidence which has been submitted to the Committee's inquiry into
the 1967 Abortion Act by both fpa and the Faculty. We believe
that the evidence they have gathered clearly demonstrates that:
1) There have been no scientific or medical
advances to justify a reduction in the current abortion time limit.
Women seeking later abortions often face exceptional and difficult
circumstances.
2) Liberalisation of access to abortions
in the first trimester would be safe and practical. This is reflected
in international medical practice, for example in the United States.
These changes would benefit women.
3) There is no conclusive evidence linking
abortion with long-term or acute adverse health outcomes; but
it is well documented that restricting access to abortion is harmful
to women's health.
The Group holds regular meetings on abortion,
including a meeting in December 2006 which investigated why women
need later abortions and whether there the current upper time
limit for legal abortions should be reduced. The Group heard evidence
from Dr Donald Peebles, University College London; Liz Davies,
Marie Stopes International; and Jane Fisher, Antenatal Results
and Choices. The Group concluded that there was no evidence to
support a reduction in the current time limit. I would be happy
to supply the Committee with a copy of the report of this meeting
if it is helpful.
September 2007
| 
