Dear Sir,
Many of us are distressed by the huge number of abortions taking place, but we wish Donald Morrison (in his letter in en January) had considered the following facts before calling for a simple repeal of the 1967 Abortion Act as a response to this.
1. It is always possible to think up extreme cases where an abortion might be ‘the lesser of two evils’. For example, when the mother’s life would be threatened if the pregnancy goes to full term. Or, where an underage girl is pregnant as a result of rape and would suffer severe physical and mental damage if the pregnancy goes to full term. It was consideration of such cases that led many to support the 1967 Act in the first place. How does he propose to answer such cases?
2. As his own letter to MPs quotes, the 1967 Act was not intended to introduce ‘abortion on demand’ but ‘to allow legal abortions for women whose health would be seriously put at risk from a pregnancy’. Plainly, that is not how it is now being applied. Many, not just Christian critics of abortion, will have been horrified to read that a doctor who allowed an abortion because a child was not of the sex the parents wanted was not prosecuted, even though this violated not only the 1967 Act, but also sex equality law. Any criticism should be directed not at the 1967 Act, but at the DPP. Very few MPs are likely to take any notice of a call to repeal the 1967 Act, but how could any of them deny that laws should be applied as Parliament intended?
3. Why did this letter come under the name of Mr Morrison? There are plenty of Christian ladies who are critical of abortion, why did he not get one of them to send the letter? It is women whose health is likely to suffer as a result of pregnancy or abortion, so it is their voice that should dominate such discussions.
Yours faithfully,
