Abortion and the law
Sir: Believing that abortion on demand ought to be allowed, Mrs J. S. Mason (23 June) naturally sees nothing objectionable in the Medical Termina- tion of Pregnancy Bill. For she will no doubt agree that this is what it will lead to, when the mother can shop around until she finds two doctors to agree, with no questions asked.
But this is not how the Bill is being repre- sented by its supporters. An editorial in the New Statesman (26 May), in the week before the report stage, stated that 'In no sense whatever does it provide for "abortion on demand" as opponents claim.' And Mr Steel himself has often said that this is not his intention, though he has refused to accept amendments designed to limit abortion on demand. But he has not explained how this is to be avoided by his Bill, in its present form.
Mrs Mason will hardly deny that a woman in the second and third months of pregnancy often feels far from well, and may be beset by all sorts of irrational fears and fancies. As any sensible person knows, these result from physio- logical disturbances which are quite normal and which usually soon disappear. But does Mrs Mason really think that this is the best time for a mother to be given the responsibility for deciding the life or death of her child, and to resist possible
pressures from others with an interest to be rid of it? And is it really no more than 'blind, in- sensitive, male arrogance' to take into account not only what the mother may think are her wishes at this difficult time, but also the rights of the unborn child to its life, before deciding to kill it by abortion?
Previous page
