2013 abortion statistics for England and Wales

-->

The recently released UK abortion statistics for 2013 show a gradual increase, in that the total number of abortions at 185,331 was 0.1% more than in 2012 (185,122) and 2.1% more than in 2003 (181,582).

The age-standardised abortion rate was highest for women aged 22 (at 30 per 1,000). Other recorded rates were15.9 per 1,000 women aged 15-44, the under-18 rate was 11.7 per 1,000 women and the under-16 abortion rate was 2.6 per 1,000 women respectively.

The recently published 2013 statistics also show that for the twelfth consecutive year the number of abortions recorded for women giving Irish addresses has declined from a high of 6,673 Irish abortions in 2001 to  3679 in 2013 representing a reduction of 44.8%. The figures also denote a year on year reduction, down from 3982 in 2012 to the current level of 3679

These reductions are to be welcomed however the fact that the lives of 3679 Irish babies were terminated in 2013 is a tragedy and more must be done to ensure that every baby who is conceived will be brought to birth and welcomed into our society.

Every abortion is an immense human tragedy but the significant drop in numbers travelling to Britain for abortion over the past 12 years is a positive development.

Sadly the introduction of abortion legislation into Ireland while it has not yet come into effect will influence future abortion statistics.

Attitudes, which foster the idea of abortion as any kind of a solution to pregnancy must be firmly rejected and perpetrators and facilitators of this barbaric act who operate under the guise of caring for women, must be exposed.  Abortion is big business.

Paul Tully, General Secretary of the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (SPUC), in a statement said that the abortion statistics reveal once again a huge toll of child-killing, now almost wholly funded by taxpayers. Over 8 million unborn children have now officially been slaughtered under Britain's iniquitous abortion law, the Abortion Act 1967.

"More abortions than ever are now funded by the NHS, and most of them are performed in private clinics by the so-called abortion charities. Nearly 119,000 unborn children were killed in private hospitals in 2013 at taxpayers' expense. A further 62,000 unborn children were killed in NHS hospitals - also at taxpayers' expense.”

Failure to prosecute doctors for sex selection abortions in the UK causes outrage

We reported last week on the failure of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) in the UK to prosecute abortionists who broke the law by carrying out sex selection abortions. Dr Peter Saunders in a new article says, ‘if the CPS won’t do its job then concerned citizens will step in. The CPS was giving the message that people wanting sex-selective abortions should come to Britain and that if the law is not upheld it will be increasingly flouted by unscrupulous people.’

Dr Saunders article ‘Outrage over failure to prosecute doctors for sex selection abortions reaches new heights’, is reprinted below. 

It has not been an easy two weeks for Keir Starmer (pictured), the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP).

When it emerged on 4 September that the Crown Prosecution Service, which he heads, would not be bringing charges against two doctors who had been caught authorising abortions purely on grounds of gender, the outrage was immediate.

Within hours the Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt said that sex selection abortions were ‘completely unacceptable’ and called for the Attorney General Dominic Grieve to seek an ‘urgent clarification’ about the decision.

The following day Lord Macdonald, the former DPP, described the decision as ‘very dubious’ and amounted to letting doctors ‘avoid criminal action’ because of their professional status - undermining the basic principle that ‘everyone is equal under the law’.

The CPS then made the situation worse by arguing that it was down to doctors to ‘interpret the law’ and that they had ‘wide discretion’ to assess whether a termination is legal or not. Although there was enough evidence to bring a prosecution it was not in the public interest to do so, they claimed. The matter was more appropriately a matter for the General Medical Council (GMC).

This led the GMC to distance itself from the CPS’s decision, insisting that, as a professional regulator, it should not be seen as a ‘substitute’ for the criminal justice system and is not there to ‘punish doctors’.

Emily Thornberry, Labour shadow attorney general, then wrote to the DPP to request an urgent review of the decision. She cut right to the heart of the issues at stake (full text here):

‘The GMC is a regulator and cannot bring criminal proceedings. The provisions of the Abortion Act 1967 are crystal clear. The conduct of abortions for reasons not stated in that Act is a criminal offence, not just a regulatory one. To decide not prosecute because a regulator can hear the matter instead is to disapply the law and undermine the will of Parliament.’

David Burrowes, a Tory member of the all-party parliamentary Pro-Life Group, then raised the issue in the Commons. He said: ‘There is urgent need for a statement to clarify whether the restrictions on choice in the Abortion Act are now meaningless.’

This led to the Prime Minister expressing concern in response to a parliamentary question from Tory MP Nadine Dorries.

Mr Cameron praised The Daily Telegraph for highlighting ‘this important case’ and said it was ‘absolutely right’ that the doctors could face ‘professional’ consequences.

This weekend 50 MPs supported the Health Secretary’s call for the matter to be urgently investigated.

In a letter to the Daily Telegraph they called the decision a ‘step back in the fight for gender equality’ and accused the DPP of usurping parliament’s role:

‘The decision by the CPS could lead to the conclusion that gender-specific abortion is merely a matter of professional misconduct rather than illegal. This is clearly unconstitutional as it is for Parliament to legislate to change the law, and it has occurred without recourse to Parliament. Safeguards in the 1967 Abortion Act need to be properly applied and enforced. Doctors are not above the law and the General Medical Council cannot be a substitute for the courts.’

Other critics have accused the DPP of ‘double standards’ over abortion laws and operating a policy ‘worthy of Alice in Wonderland’.

Last Friday the Christian Legal Centre said it was preparing for a private prosecution against the two doctors.

‘We are preparing for a private prosecution or judicial review, but we may do both,’ said chief executive Andrea Williams. ‘We will not let the matter go.’

I was asked to comment and said to the Telegraph that if the CPS won’t do its job then concerned citizens will step in. The CPS was giving the message that people wanting sex-selective abortions should come to Britain and that if the law is not upheld it will be increasingly flouted by unscrupulous people.

By failing to act the DPP has signalled that Britain is open for business as far as sex selection abortions are concerned.

I can’t ever recall any issue related to abortion uniting those across the political spectrum in the way this has done. It has brought prolife activists and prochoice feminist factions together in an extraordinary way resulting in Keir Starmer attracting the wrath of all sides.

Now all the heat is on the DPP to explain fully why he has not upheld the will of parliament. We are all waiting.

UK Crown Prosecution Service double standards on abortion prosecutions

Sex selection abortion is common in India and China but this phenomenon also exists in western countries including the UK. We reported in early 2012 on a Daily Telegraph article relating to two sting operations, which had established that female feticide is also practiced in UK abortion clinics.  We reported at the time that Andrew Lansley, the Health Secretary had passed a dossier of the alleged malpractice at the clinics in question to the police and the General Medical Council.

The Telegraph reported last week, under the banner "Gender abortions: criminal charges not in 'public interest' says CPS", that despite the overwhelming evidence the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) have decided not to take action and that it would not be in the public interest to do so.

This decision clearly shows that there is a double standard in the implementation of the law in the UK when it comes to abortion.

Paul Tully of the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (SPUC)  in a statement said,

The announcement by the Crown Prosecution Service that it is not going to charge doctors for offering ‘sex-selection’ abortion smacks of a politically influenced decision.

There is little appetite in the pro-life movement for vindictive prosecution of doctors or others who kill babies, but we should expect the rule of law to be upheld, fairly and justly.

Dr Peter Saunders, chief executive of the Christian Medical Fellowship, who was among those who complained to police, said: “We seem to have a situation where, at the whim of the CPS, procedures that are clearly laid out in the Abortion Act can be completely disregarded by doctors and the NHS.

“That seems to put doctors above the law and raises questions about the CPS upholding the will of Parliament.

“We seem to have doctors being allowed to reinterpret the law with apparent impunity — it is quite extraordinary.”

On the other hand the CPS is very quick to take criminal proceedings against pro-life demonstrators as has been reported  by the Telegraph on Monday Sept 9th

Nearly half a million new sexual infections in 2012 in the UK

According to a new report sexually transmitted infections are still rising in the UK. This is not surprising bearing in mind that public policy and comprehensive sexual education programmes are not only unhelpful but are a substantial part of the cause.

According to the report based on PHE data;

New sexually transmitted infection diagnoses rose 5% in 2012, however rather than facing the truth and making drastic changes to public policy such as the introduction of education that encourages abstinence based programmes for singles and faithfulness in marriage the PHE claim that the increased numbers are mostly due to improved data collection and their resultant recommendations centre around safer condom use. 

New sexually transmitted infection (STI) diagnoses rose 5% in 2012 (up to 448,422 from 428,255 in 2011) according to Public Health England (PHE) data published today (5 June, 2013), mostly due to improved data collection. However, the continuing high STI rates in England suggest too many people are still putting themselves at risk through unsafe sex, especially young adults and men who have sex with men (MSM).

Chlamydia remained the most commonly diagnosed STI (206,912; 46%), but considerable numbers of genital warts (73,893; 16%) and genital herpes (32,021; 7%) cases were also reported last year. New gonorrhoea diagnoses rose 21% overall (from 21,024 in 2011 to 25,525 in 2012), and by 37% in the MSM population (to 10,754).

High gonorrhoea transmission rates are concerning as the global threat of antibiotic resistance grows. Ensuring treatment resistant strains of gonorrhoea do not persist and spread remains a public health priority, and the Gonorrhoea Resistance Action Plan for England and Wales was launched by PHE to help tackle this threat in early 2013.

Those aged under 25 experienced the highest STI rates, contributing 64% chlamydia and 54% of genital warts diagnoses in heterosexuals in 2012. Young adults are advised to test for chlamydia annually or on change of sexual partner, as part of the National Chlamydia Screening Programme to control the infection and its complications. In 2012, over 1.7 million chlamydia tests were undertaken and over 136,000 diagnoses made.

Dr Gwenda Hughes, PHE head of STI surveillance, said,

There have been significant improvements in screening in recent years, particularly for gonorrhoea and chlamydia among young adults and men who have sex with men, so we are diagnosing and treating more infections than ever before.

However, these data show too many people are continuing to have unsafe sex, put themselves at risk of STIs and the serious consequences associated with infection, including infertility. Ongoing investment in programmes to increase sexual health awareness, condom use and testing, particularly for groups at most risk, is vital.

We must also ensure chlamydia screening remains widely available. Local authorities should continue to integrate chlamydia screening into broader health services for young adults. This will also help this age group develop positive relationships with services, enabling them to develop and maintain good sexual health throughout their lives.

Professor Kevin Fenton, PHE director of health and wellbeing, said,

Public Health England welcomed the Department of Health’s ‘Framework for Sexual Health Improvement in England’ published earlier this year, setting out a range of ambitions. We are committed to improving the nation’s sexual health, with a focus on the groups most at risk, and will provide local authorities and clinical commissioning groups with data on local health needs, coupled with evidence-based advice on STI prevention and sexual health promotion approaches, to improve risk awareness and encourage safer sexual behaviours.

Getting screened for HIV and STIs can lead to early diagnosis and treatment, as often these infections have no symptoms. In addition, reducing the number of sexual partners and avoiding overlapping sexual relationships can reduce the risk of being infected with an STI.

According to the report

Individuals can also significantly reduce their risk of catching or passing on an STI by:

Always using a condom when having sex with casual and new partners.

Getting tested regularly if in one of the highest risk groups:

Sexually active under 25 year olds should be screened for chlamydia every year, and on change of sexual partner.

MSM having unprotected sex with casual or new partners should have an HIV/STI screen at least annually, and every three months if changing partners regularly.

What they fail to appreciate is that more of the same advice will produce more of the same results when will they ever learn

Potentially high levels of criminal activity in UK abortion clinics

The Daily Telegraph has continued its campaign in relation to abortion clinics with additional articles on March 22nd and 23^rd see previous my BLOGS February 24th and March 15th

The Telegraph reported in an article on March 22nd that one in five abortion clinics in the UK is suspected of breaking the law and faces a police inquiry following an official investigation ordered by the Health Secretary.

The regulator  according to the report conducted a series of unannounced raids on every clinic offering abortions this week and found that a “shocking” number may be breaking the law.

The Daily Telegraph understands that more than 250 private and NHS clinics were visited and more than 50 were “not in compliance” with the law or regulations. Doctors were regularly falsifying consent forms and patients were not receiving acceptable levels of advice and counselling in many clinics, the Care Quality Commission (CQC) discovered.

Andrew Lansley, the Health Secretary, said he was “shocked” by the findings of the CQC’s audit and was preparing to report doctors and organisations to the police. Many clinics may be stripped of the licences that allow them to offer abortions.

Mr Lansley they report is understood to be preparing an urgent statement to Parliament on the scandal.

In a further article on March 23rd the Telegraph reports :

Most clinics were visited by the much-maligned Care Quality Commission (CQC) once every few years and a culture of “abortions on demand” appeared to have been introduced by some doctors.

However, this culture seems to have been brought to an end when Andrew Lansley, the Health Secretary, who was shocked by what he read in this newspaper, ordered the regulator into action. Enforcement officers from the watchdog visited every clinic in Britain and their findings are raising serious concern at the highest levels of government.

Today’s disclosures about the potentially high levels of criminal activity in abortion clinics came several months after this newspaper was tipped off that some doctors were illicitly offering sex-selective abortions. Paperwork was allegedly being forged.

Earlier this year, four pregnant women of different ethnic backgrounds, accompanied by undercover reporters, travelled around the country to appointments at abortion clinics.

At each organisation, the pregnant woman explained that she wanted an abortion because of the gender of the foetus. Some clinics refused to help her, saying it was illegal to arrange an abortion for this reason. Others were willing to help.

UK proposals on abortion counselling fraught with danger

There are currently two proposals before Parliament to alter the current status of abortion counselling in the UK.  The First, known as the Dorries/Field amendment, which is a seriously flawed life protection measure with the potential of banning all pro-life counselling. The second is a pro-abortion alternative tabled by Conservative MP Louise Mench which raises even more serious concerns than the Dorries/Field amendment. 
The Mench proposal is scheduled to come before Parliament on Thursday.

SPUC have issued briefings on both as follows. The say on the Dorries/Field amendment

There is a great deal of confusion and controversy over the pregnancy counselling amendment to the health bill (Health and Social Care Bill) being proposed by Mrs Nadine Dorries and Rt Hon. Frank Field. From the very outset, SPUC has expressed serious reservations about the amendment (see Pro-Life Times, p.1), and recent reports have deepened our concerns. At the heart of the matter are two key issues: one is the question of what the Dorries/Field amendments are seeking to do (and it is not at all clear what they are seeking to do), and the other is the question of whether Nadine Dorries and Frank Field are pro-life.

At one level the aim of the amendments is simple – to require GPs to offer pregnant women considering abortion the chance to have “independent” information, advice and counselling. But what will this consist of? Will the three elements (information, advice, counselling) be provided together, or separately? Who will the counsellors be? Will the information include where to obtain an abortion? Will it include sources of help to continue with a pregnancy? While Nadine Dorries and Frank Field have presented their aim as stopping BPAS and other abortion organisations from offering pregnancy counselling, their amendment would not in fact stop doctors referring women to abortion clinics for counselling as long as doctors mention independent counsellors too.

The second issue of confusion is whether Nadine Dorries and Frank Field are pro-life – in the simple sense of wanting to save unborn lives. They are not making this very evident. Nadine Dorries repeatedly stresses in press interviews and on her internet blog that she is “pro-choice”. She supports the Abortion Act. She said she “would hate to see a return to the dark days of back-street operations.“ She has also said:
“I'll say it again, no organisation which is paid for carrying out abortions and no organisation that thinks it's appropriate to bring God into a counselling session with a vulnerable woman, should be allowed anywhere near the counselling room.”
Some people think that she is just being clever. If so, this is a dangerous and foolish tactic. With powerful and well-resourced opponents in the pro-abortion lobby, she is liable to be held to account for such statements. For his part, Frank Field has refused to meet pro-life groups to discuss the proposals.

With regard to the Louise Mench proposal the aim of which according to herself is,
"to satisfy pro-choice... To make sure every pro-choice objection in the Dorries/Field amendment are answered"
"Counselling would have to include abortion advice (how, when, medical) so many (Christians) might opt out."
If they cannot offer neutral advice on abortions the shouldn't be counsellors, by definition they must explore all options."

The SPUC analysis of the Mench proposal can be found on this link

UK annual abortion statistics for 2010

The UK Department of Health annual abortion statistics released yesterday show another increase in the number of abortions and in addition it shows that the number of repeat abortions is also very high.

According to a SPUC news release  the latest annual abortion figures represent 190,000 unborn babies whose deaths were entirely avoidable. The figures for England and Wales show a slight increase in registered abortions over the previous year. Abortions were 8% higher than 10 years before in 2000.

In contrast however the figures relative to Irish women travelling to the UK, from both Northern Ireland and the Irish Republic for abortion, show a further decline for the ninth consecutive year.

The statistics released by the Department of Health show that in 2010, 4,402 women from the Republic of Ireland travelled to Britain for abortions, down from 4,422 for the previous year. It is the ninth consecutive year that Irish abortions have declined after more than a decade of upward trends. It marks a 34% decline since the high of 6,673 Irish abortions in 2001. Ireland’s abortion rate is now 4.4 per 1,000 female residents aged 15-44 where England’s is 17.5.

The number of women from Northern Ireland travelling to England for abortion has reduced from 1577 in 2001 to 1101 in 2010

Whilst it is tragic that any Irish woman (or any woman for that matter) feels the necessity to terminate the life of a baby nevertheless this continued downward trend in abortions is to be welcomed.

The recorded 34% decline in Irish abortions over the past nine years is an extremely encouraging trend and should be welcomed by everyone on both sides of the abortion debate. For years, abortion advocates claimed that an upward trend in abortions was inevitable. These claims have now proven to be false.

Those who constantly seek to change our laws to provide for legalization of abortion ignore both the humanity and rights of the unborn child and the long-term negative effects of abortion on women.