Depopulation agenda marches forward: UK House of Lords passes legislation legalising DIY abortion up to and during birth

Clause 208 of the Crime and Policing Bill, originally introduced in the House of Commons by Labour Member of Parliament (“MP”) Tonia Antoniazzi, was debated in the Commons in June 2025 for only 46 minutes and passed with 379 MPs for and 137 MPs against.

The House of Lords’ vote on Wednesday followed a failed attempt by Baroness Rosa Monckton to remove the clause entirely.  The change does not alter the current 24-week legal limit for abortion but eliminates criminal sanctions for self-induced terminations beyond that point.

Critics, including Christian groups and other pro-life groups like Right to Life and Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (“SPUC”), argue the Bill passed by the Lords undermines safeguards, increases risks to women’s health and could lead to more late-term abortions, including of viable babies.

When the Bill was passed through the House of Commons in June 2025, Catholic Archbishop John Sherrington said, “New Clause 1 lifts any criminal liability for women performing their abortions for any reason, at any time … Women will be even more vulnerable to manipulation, coerced and forced abortions. This legal change will also discourage medical consultation and make the use of abortion pills for dangerous late-term, at-home abortions more likely.”

“New Clause 1” was renumbered Clause 191 while passing through the legislative process in the House of Commons.

Last month, Right to Life warned that 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.”

Clause 191 was renumbered to Clause 208 during the House of Lords’ Report Stage.

Ahead of the vote in the House of Lords, Archbishop Sherrington said, “Apart from the further threat Clause 208 poses to the lives of unborn babies and the health of their mothers, this change would leave women more susceptible to coercion and abuse.”

Michael Robinson, Executive Director of SPUC, said, “These profound changes to the Abortion Act are being pushed through without any pre-legislative scrutiny, public consultation or a detailed impact assessment … those supporting these changes have done so based on ideology and without a proper understanding of their adverse effects.”

Former Health Minister Maria Caulfield warned that the change would mean “infanticide … would become possible with no legal consequence,” adding that “our society will be damaged and its moral credibility greatly diminished.”

The Lords also voted to reject an amendment by Baroness Philippa Stroud to reinstate in-person consultations with a doctor to be able to receive abortion pills.  “A return to such appointments, removed during [covid] lockdown, would have better protected against women taking the pills after the ten-week limit which they are designed for,” The Christian Institute said.

Adding, “Abortion pills are not supposed to be used beyond very early stages, but the current ‘pills-by-post’ scheme allows women easy access to the drugs regardless of their child’s gestational age.”

Keep reading