Affiliation:
1. Durham Law School, Durham University, Durham, UK
Abstract
Abstract
In a recent case before the High Court of England and Wales, Crowter v Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, three claimants challenged the disability ground for abortion contained in section 1(1)(d) of the Abortion Act 1967. It was argued on behalf of the claimants that this provision was incompatible with a number of rights protected by the European Convention on Human Rights. Among the arguments made was a claim that this provision perpetuates discriminatory attitudes and negative stereotypes towards disabled people. While the case was rightly unsuccessful, as restricting or removing section 1(1)(d) would only force pregnant people to continue pregnancies in difficult circumstances, the claim around discrimination carries some weight. The High Court rejected this line of argument, missing an opportunity to consider the ways in which the Abortion Act is both inadequate in relation to access to abortion and perpetuates stigma towards disabled people. However, the reform required to address this must take place in Parliament and cannot be done by the courts.
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Subject
Law,Medicine (miscellaneous)
Cited by
5 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献