Increase in IUD expulsions

I read the commentary1 on ‘Abortion law: campaign groups and the quest for change’ in the October 2006 issue of the Journal with interest. In general, it provides a very balanced overview of the different groups seeking change in UK abortion legislation, summarising the concerns of both pro-life and pro-choice organisations. However, in his discussion and conclusions, Dr Vincent Argent ceases to be impartial and reveals his own prejudices, consistent with his position as Medical Director of bpas. He asserts that anti-abortion campaigners are seeking to “whittle away” at the legal provision of abortion until such time as they can prevent abortion taking place altogether. This is patently not true. At least two of the pro-life organisations cited are aiming to reform abortion legislation and to see it enforced properly, but do not seek to ban it altogether. He then describes the sentiment that “the smaller and less well developed the fetus is, the less they feel uncomfortable about the idea of abortion” as a common-sense pragmatic view. He is thus implicitly labelling any who do not hold to this sentiment as lacking common sense. Finally, in his conclusion, Dr Argent suggests that “the majority of women in the UK agree with those groups calling for change in the law to allow easier and earlier access and women’s choice on abortion”. On what evidence does he base this statement? The only evidence he alludes to is in the sentence “Other polls generally show support for earlier abortion on request and improved access”. He does mention a recent MORI poll, which claimed that 47% of women believe the legal time limit for abortion should be reduced from 24 weeks. But he makes no specific reference to the “other polls”, which he claims show that the majority of women in the UK would like easier access to abortion. Having read earlier in the commentary about the views of five large organisations that are prolife, it appears that many women would support either reduced access to abortion or stricter enforcement of the current abortion law as originally intended. I therefore find it difficult to believe Dr Argent’s assertions without proper evidence to back them up.