The high profile investigation is certainly putting doctors on notice that the practice faces fierce parliamentary opposition to say nothing of the rule of law
The British Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has decided against prosecuting two doctors for performing gender based abortions, despite clear video evidence that the sole reason for terminating the pregnancy was because of the gender (girls) of the child.
The Daily Telegraph had launched a sting operation, sending a pregnant woman in to pose as someone wanting an abortion simply because the foetus was a girl. The Doctors agreed despite the fact that gender based abortions in Britain are illegal.
In the video the Telegraph visited Prabha Siveraman, a consultant obstetrician and gynecologist. The female undercover reporter says up front that she has become pregnant with her partner and the test shows it's a girl which is "not appropriate for us" and that they were hoping for a boy. Miss Siveraman responds with "I don't ask questions, if you want a termination, you want a termination." She then makes a phone call to arrange the procedure. The phone call includes the words "she doesn't want to go through NHS" (National Health Service) and "that's right because you're part of our team and she doesn't want questions asked".
Despite there being a "realistic prospect of conviction", according to (CPS) they say going forward with prosecution is not in the public interest. CPS stated in their report that "in this case there are public interest factors both in favour of and against prosecution". However they have so far declined to state what interest factors exist to oppose prosecution.
Typically an interest factor to oppose would include a man assaulting another man who had raped his wife or daughter. In cases like this it is deemed that the reaction is justified and no public good is served by a criminal prosecution.
In this case it is hard to understand. The CPS tellingly included the following paragraph in its report. "On considering the public interest factors, as set out in the Code for Crown prosecutors, one highly relevant factor in this regard is that the responsible professional body, in this case the General Medical Council, is already involved and has the power to remove doctors from the medical register. Taking into account the need for professional judgement which deals firmly with wrongdoing, while not deterring other doctors from carrying out legitimate and medically justified abortions, we have concluded that these specific cases would be better dealt with by the GMC rather than by prosecution."
Put simply this is the CPS electing to punt on political grounds. They've decided, contrary to law, that because there is a professional body that can judge the doctor's actions they will not, despite admitting that the case passes the test that a conviction would be likely.
Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt expressed his concerns over the decision, and has called for "urgent clarification" from the Attorney General, saying "We are clear that gender selection abortion is against the law and completely unacceptable. This is a concerning development and I have written to the Attorney General to ask for urgent clarification on the grounds for this decision".
Dr Peter Saunders, chief executive of the Christian Medical Fellowship added: "We seem to have a situation where, at the whim of the CPS, procedures that are clearly laid out in the Abortion Act can be completely disregarded by doctors and the NHS. That seems to put doctors above the law and raises questions about the CPS upholding the will of Parliament. We seem to have doctors being allowed to reinterpret the law with apparent impunity -- it is quite extraordinary."
The revelations follow a motion for a '10 minute rule bill' designed to spark debate, introduced in April by Conservative Fiona Bruce and Labour MP Jim Dobbin. Bruce said if MPs are to condemn the gender abortion practices of China and India, they must "be ready to condemn and challenge any suggestion that gendercide is taking place in the UK. Concerns about abortion on the grounds of sex selection taking place in the UK, and to remind us all, whether regulators, prosecuting authorities, doctors, the Department of Health or, crucially, Ministers, that we cannot turn a blind eye to the issue and should be proactive in preventing, challenging and stopping it as something that is wholly unacceptable in the UK, as well as abroad."
While it seems, gender based abortion has been going on, the high profile investigation is certainly putting doctors on notice that the practice faces fierce parliamentary opposition to say nothing of the rule of law. This will likely bring caution to the abortion winds but much more severe action is necessary to stop it altogether.
