House of Lords Amendments to Bill that would permit Abortion up to Birth

A Press Release from the charity ‘Right to Life’ details how today, the House of Lords is considering a major bid to overturn the ‘decriminalisation of abortion up to birth’ clause and reinstate in-person consultations with a medical professional prior to an abortion taking place at home … The news comes with some heartbreaking statistics of the latest abortion figures in the UK and the dangers which ‘at home abortions’ pose to women … 

At the Lords Committee Stage of the Crime and Policing Bill on Monday 2 February, two high-profile members of the House of Lords, Baroness Monckton and Baroness Stroud, have tabled Committee Stage amendments, along with other Peers, to overturn the highly controversial abortion up to birth amendment (clause 191) to the Crime and Policing Bill, and to reinstate in-person consultations with a medical professional prior to an abortion taking place at home.

This follows the Second Reading of the Crime and Policing Bill, where a large number of Peers spoke in opposition to the abortion up to birth clause and in support of reinstating in-person consultations, as proposed by Baroness Stroud’s amendment. An analysis of speeches at Second Reading completed by Right To Life UK’s Policy Team found that of the 20 Peers who took a position on the abortion up to birth clause in the Bill, 13 (65%) spoke in opposition and 7 (35%) spoke in support of the law change proposed by that clause. This represents almost double the number of Peers who spoke in opposition to the abortion up to birth clause compared with those who supported it.

Consideration of these amendments comes as new figures showed a record of almost 300,000 abortions took place across the United Kingdom in 2023.

Amendment to overturn abortion up to birth clause
Clause 191 would change the law so it would no longer be illegal for women to perform their own abortions for any reason, including sex-selective purposes, and at any point up to and during birth, likely leading to a significant increase in the number of women performing dangerous late-term abortions at home. The clause was introduced by Tonia Antoniazzi MP in the Commons after just 46 minutes of backbench debate – there was no prior consultation with the public, no Committee Stage scrutiny and no evidence sessions. The amendment (that Clause 191 not stand part) that Baroness Monckton has tabled at Commitee Stage, along with other female Members of the House of Lords, would remove clause 191 from the Crime and Policing Bill.

Polling shows that 89% of the general population and 91% of women agree that gender-selective abortion should be explicitly banned by the law – and only 1% of women support introducing abortion up to birth.

Another poll shows that more than half of the general public agree that it should remain the case that a woman is breaking the law if she has an abortion of a healthy baby after the current 24-week legal time limit up until birth. Only 16% disagreed.

The introduction of the clause to the Crime and Policing Bill caused a major backlash, which included 91% of 28,000 respondents to a poll run by The Telegraph saying they were opposed to the extreme law change that would be introduced by clause 191.

Amendment to reinstate in-person consultations with a medical professional prior to an abortion taking place at home
Baroness Stroud has also tabled an amendment (amendment 460), along with other Peers, to reinstate in-person consultations with a medical professional prior to an abortion taking place at home. Baroness Stroud’s amendment would ensure women have an in-person appointment before taking abortion pills at home. The consideration of abortion amendments to the Crime and Policing Bill at Committee Stage was initially expected to be earlier in the year, but was then scheduled for today, when Baroness Stroud is not available to introduce her amendment. Baroness Foster, who is also a co-sponsor of the amendment, introduced the amendment in the House of Lords instead.

Polling shows widespread public support for the law change that is proposed by Baroness Stroud’s amendment, with two-thirds of women supporting the reinstatement of in-person appointments and only 4% in favour of the status quo.

Baroness Stroud previously warned of the dangers of allowing at-home abortions before the policy was made permanent in March 2022 – many of those dangers have, sadly, since occurred.

Spokesperson for Right To Life UK, Catherine Robinson, said:
“Pro-abortion MPs hijacked a government Bill to rush through this radical and seismic change to our abortion laws after just 46 minutes of backbench debate. This was the first time this extreme amendment had been debated in Parliament, and there has been no public consultation on this far-reaching change to our laws. If this proposal becomes law, it would be the most significant change to abortion legislation since the Abortion Act was introduced in 1967.

The law change would likely lead to the lives of many more women being endangered because of the risks involved with self-administered late-term abortions and also tragically lead to an increased number of viable babies’ lives being ended well beyond the 24-week abortion time limit and beyond the point at which they would be able to survive outside the womb.

The abortion lobby is pushing to decriminalise abortion to cover up the disastrous effects of its irresponsible pills by post scheme, which endangers women by removing the requirement for in-person consultations before abortion pills may be prescribed. The solution is clear. We should urgently reinstate in-person appointments. This simple safeguard would help prevent women’s lives from being put at risk from self-administered late-term abortions, a danger that would be exacerbated if abortion were ‘decriminalised’ right up to birth.”

Ahead of tabling her Committee Stage amendment,  Baroness Monckton of Dallington Forest MBE said:
“If passed in its current form, the Crime and Policing Bill would change the law so it would no longer be illegal for women to perform their own abortions for any reason and at any stage, right up to birth. This is an extreme social change for which there is no public pressure or demand, and could have tragic consequences for women, as well as leading to increased numbers of abortions of viable babies. This radical clause was added to the Bill after less than an hour of debate by MPs, and without the necessary scrutiny required for an issue of such seriousness. Whatever one’s views on abortion, this is not how responsible laws are made.

A large number of peers have indicated that they will support my amendment to remove Clause 191 and join me in supporting Baroness Stroud’s amendment to require an in-person consultation before abortion pills are taken at home, so that gestation, health risks and any coercion risks can be properly assessed.”

Ahead of tabling her Committee Stage amendment, Baroness Stroud said:
“Supporters of decriminalising abortion up to birth cite a small number of prosecutions of women for illegal late-term abortions in recent years. The increase in such cases is a direct result of the ‘pills by post’ scheme, whereby women can receive abortion pills without an in-person consultation to verify their gestational age is within the legal limit. The solution to such cases is not to make matters worse by removing the legal deterrent against women performing their own at-home abortions up to birth, which would likely endanger women further, but to reinstate in-person consultations.

I, and many others, warned of the dangers of the ‘pills by post’ scheme when it was introduced. Sadly, those warnings have come true. My amendment would ensure medical professionals can accurately assess a woman’s gestational age, any health risks and the risk of coercion before abortion pills are prescribed. This change has widespread public support and would better protect women by helping prevent further cases of coerced or dangerous late-term abortions linked to the ‘pills by post’ scheme.”

Several other amendments tabled
Several other amendments have been tabled at Committee Stage by Peers who are concerned by the negative impact that the abortion up to birth clause 191 in the Bill will likely have. These amendments include:

• Amendment 459 (Baroness Eaton) – maintains a prohibition on sex-selective
  • Further recent coverage on this amendment and the issue of sex-selective abortion:
    • 17 January 2026 – Record number of baby girls aborted by Indian parents in the UK due to preference for male children – Daily Mail
    • 10 January 2026 – Foetal femicide has arrived in Britain – The Spectator
    • 28 December 2025 – Charity says it’s not illegal to abort babies because they are girls – The Times
    • British charity blasted as ‘irresponsible’ for saying it’s not illegal to abort babies because they are girls – GB News
    • 27 December 2025 – Fury as charity says it’s not illegal for British Indians to abort babies because they are girls – Daily Mail 
    • 28 November 2025 – Britain needs an explicit ban on sex-selective abortion – Georgia L Gilholy
• Amendment 455 (Baroness Meyer) – maintains a legal deterrent under the Infant Life (Preservation) Act
• Amendment 457 (Lord Jackson) – requires an annual review of the impact of clause 191
• Amendment 459B (Baroness Maclean) – introduces a ‘sunset clause’ for Clause 191
• Amendment 461 (Baroness O’Loan) – ensures criminal liability if a person assists or encourages a woman to induce her own abortion outside of the grounds specified in the Abortion Act
• Amendment 461A (Baroness Coffey) – requires abortion providers to ensure “beyond reasonable doubt” that a woman meets the legal grounds for abortion before pills may be prescribed.

Right to Life has made even more detailed information available on Lady Monckton and Lady Stroud’s pro-life amendments to the Crime and Policing Bill – please see the .pdf below:

Right to Life - House of Lords Pro-life Challenges to Clause 191

For more information on the charity Right to Life, please visit their website!

Our Lady of Unfailing Help: pray for the unborn and for all mothers, fathers and families affected by abortion.