illegal if the Bill came into force.
fundamenta inconsistencies the Bill. Of reactionary change.
Ancram said from what he called a interpretation to abortion.
Assessment A proper associated found that the risk of having abortion less at a very late stage).
as two doctors agreed.
would then be left wide can longer approach of magicaily THE ABORTION (Amendment) Bill has been put forward to change the 1967 Abortion Act. According to at least one esumate two-lnirds or tne abortions carried out now would be The thinking behind the Bill shows within itself. This was clear after a meeting Ancram, Edinburgh South and co-sponsor of even if the Louse, thinking was more self-consistent, the measure would still represent a very the intention in changing the '67 Act was to get away *statistical 'individual' interpretation. The '67 Act allows a woman to have an abortion if two doctors are willing to agree that the risk of continuing with the pregnancy is greater than the risk of having an assessment of this involves considering a large number comparing risks pregnancies and abortions that have occurred in the Past in a systelal, ant contrent way Professor Peter Huntingford of the London Hospital did just that and developed an than the risk pregnancy associated with pregnancy (at least as long as the abortion is not carried out therefore followed that any woman who wanted an abortion should, according to the Act, legally be able to get one, so long handicapped.
The Corrie Bill removes this basic criterion and makes abortion legal decision only if there is 'grave or serious' risk to the health of the mother. This open to DEAT