Abortion investigation: doctors filmed agreeing illegal abortions 'no questions asked'

Women are being granted illegal abortions by doctors based on the sex of their unborn baby, an undercover investigation by The Daily Telegraph reveals.

Doctors at British clinics have been secretly filmed agreeing to terminate foetuses purely because they are either male or female. Clinicians admitted they were prepared to falsify paperwork to arrange the abortions even though it is illegal to conduct such “sex-selection” procedures.

Andrew Lansley, the Health Secretary, said: “I’m extremely concerned to hear about these allegations. Sex selection is illegal and is morally wrong. I’ve asked my officials to investigate this as a matter of urgency.”

The disclosures will add to growing concerns about the regulation of abortion clinics and the apparent ability of women to secure terminations “on demand”.

The Daily Telegraph carried out an investigation into sex-selection abortions after concerns were raised that the procedures were becoming increasingly common for cultural and social reasons.

MPs have raised concerns over the growing commercialisation of abortion clinics and David Cameron and Mr Lansley are under pressure to accept proposals that women should receive independent counselling before a procedure takes place.

Last year, the Council of Europe recommended that member states, including Britain, stop telling parents the gender of their baby because of concerns that this was encouraging sex-selection abortions. Many hospitals have stopped giving parents this information.

However, blood tests that disclose the sex of a foetus are widely available on the internet or abroad. An undercover reporter telephoning an abortion advice line was also told private clinics would be able to offer a scan — for a fee.

Abortions for non-medical reasons are legal until 24 weeks, but terminations on grounds of sex of the foetus are illegal under the 1967 Abortion Act.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/9099511/Abortion-investigation-doctors-filmed-agreeing-illegal-abortions-no-questions-asked.html/

I didn't know abortions for gender reasons were actually illegal? What are the arguments against it? Why should the woman be denied the right to control over her body for some issues but not for others?

(Tho maybe I'm missing something here)

Amendment of law relating to termination of pregnancy.(1)For paragraphs (a) and (b) of section 1(1) of the M1Abortion Act 1967 (grounds for medical termination of pregnancy) there is substituted—

“(a)that the pregnancy has not exceeded its twenty-fourth week and that the continuance of the pregnancy would involve risk, greater than if the pregnancy were terminated, of injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman or any existing children of her family; or

(b)that the termination is necessary to prevent grave permanent injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman; or

(c)that the continuance of the pregnancy would involve risk to the life of the pregnant woman, greater than if the pregnancy were terminated; or

(d)that 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.”

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1990/37/section/37/

Apparently these 4 sections are the only legal reasons for an abortion to be performed..

Anything else is illegal..

See now this type of reason for abortion i don't agree with,but there's always the "butt" which can reduce the risk of getting pregnant
Seriously though as i've stated rather it's legal or illegal,it's not my body it's hers.

This is kinda sick, really. Would never dream of aborting, just because it wasn't the preferred gender i wanted.

good point

it seems deplorable to me, but if the legal argument for abortion is that its a 'womans body', what difference does something like gender matter in something that is just a piece of her and not valid on its own....

(according to that particular philosophy)

injury to mental health could be valid here,, think of the 'look how many unwanted children are here',,argument

to some , its better to kill,, Im sorry, abort it,,,than let it become an unwanted child,,,,

So then one could have unlimited abortions till they concieve The gender of child they want? Seems that would be more harmful to her body than just having a child.

If one isn't mentally stable enough to have either a boy or a girl then they shouldn't have children at all.

I have been Trying to fit this link in somewhere and I am sure my friend Invivtus wont't mind me slipping it in here .



http://www.regressiveantidote.net/Articles/Jesus_Christ,_America.html

May sound cold but, if for the swke of prefernce a child gets aborted, I would consider that child fortunate to not having to suffer the idots.

You know that I can always use a good laugh..

David Green calling someone a pu$$y... I laughed for 10 minutes..

I think David was having a wee laugh himself.

I just love how the progressives have turned their racist eugenics policies into women's rights..

I have to hand it to them it has fooled quite a few people..

The Best Way Forward for Population Control is affluence.

I don't see the big deal, frankly. I fully support a woman's right to choose whatever she wants in regards to her body. So, call me an *******, but how is terminating pregnancy for arbitrary reasons (like gender) any more or less morally sound than terminating one for the arbitrary reason of... Don't want / can't afford / shouldn't have a baby? Seriously, if you're going to claim to be pro-choice, then be PRO-CHOICE. Make up your damned minds you morality-projecting buffoons.

So... poverty is the reason for the population increasing?

Everywhere in the world, in every kind of culture, the poorest people have the most children.

Everywhere in the world, in every kind of culture, the poorest people have the most children.


I agree.. That is exactly why the abortion mills are always disproportionally located in the poorest areas..