‘Real reason’ why gender abortion docs weren’t charged

The real reason why no prosecutions were brought for two doctors who approved gender abortions, is that it would expose the reality of “abortion on demand”, commentators have said.

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has faced widespread criticism after deciding not to charge the doctors – despite having enough evidence – because it would not be “in the public interest”.

And now the abortion provider BPAS has claimed that it would be “wrong” in some circumstances to refuse to consider a request on the grounds of gender, despite the Government saying that sex-selective abortions are illegal.


Fraser Nelson, editor of The Spectator, said the issue has left us in a “legal no man’s land” and the CPS are not upholding the law.

He said: “In deciding not to prosecute the doctors exposed by The Daily Telegraph, part of the CPS’s argument was that doctors are given ‘wide discretion’ to ‘interpret’ the law.”

“This is a polite way of saying that the law is almost entirely ignored. In theory, the mother’s health should be at risk before an abortion is authorised. In practice, Britain offers abortion on demand”, he said in a piece for The Daily Telegraph.


Dominic Lawson, columnist for The Sunday Times, referred to his doctor friend who said that if GPs who approve gender abortions should be struck off, so should most British doctors.

He said, “once it is established that some abortions can be prosecuted for not ‘really’ being on the legally acceptable grounds of ‘injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman’, the whole dishonest edifice of the law in this field will be exposed to the light”.

He also said Keir Starmer, the director of public prosecutions, “knows perfectly well that in reality we have abortion on demand” and is perhaps worried about this being revealed.


The ConservativeHome blog ‘the deep end’ comments that making gender abortions a specific offence against the law would “open up a debate that supporters of abortion on demand would not wish to take place.

“For instance, if it’s not OK to kill an unborn child because she is female, why is it OK to sanction her destruction because she has Down’s Syndrome?”

Lord Alton has accused the CPS of having “double standards” when it comes to prosecutions involving abortion, as it is prepared to charge pro-life campaigners but not doctors who are clearly breaking the law.

The cross-bench peer said a basic principle of all standing “equal before the law” is being violated.

Related Resources