Thursday’s court case against the British government by a woman with Down syndrome ended in defeat. The law that allowed abortion up to the birth of a foetus diagnosed with the condition was allowed.
Heidi Crowter (26 years old) and two other women took the Department of Health and Social Care before a judge. They argued that a portion of the Abortion Act was discriminatory and infringes the European Convention on Human Rights.
In England, Wales, and Scotland, abortions are permitted up to 24 weeks after the child’s birth. The law says that abortions may be permitted up to 24 weeks after the baby is born if there is a “substantial risk” that the child will be severely handicapped if it is born with mental or physical abnormalities.
Crowter, who is independent and just got married, said she finds the legislation offensive and disrespectful. Crowter stated that she would like to see the law changed to challenge people’s perceptions of Down syndrome.
Heidi Crowter (26 years old) and two other women took the Department of Health and Social Care before a judge. They argued that a portion of the Abortion Act was discriminatory and infringes the European Convention on Human Rights.
In England, Wales, and Scotland, abortions are permitted up to 24 weeks after the child’s birth. The law says that abortions may be permitted up to 24 weeks after the baby is born if there is a “substantial risk” that the child will be severely handicapped if it is born with mental or physical abnormalities.
Crowter, who is independent and just got married, said she finds the legislation offensive and disrespectful. Crowter stated that she would like to see the law changed to challenge people’s perceptions of Down syndrome.
After a two-day hearing, two senior judges dismissed Thursday’s case. They concluded that the legislation was not illegal and sought to balance the rights of unborn children and women.
Judges Rabinder Singh & Nathalie Lieven stated that the case engendered strong feelings and disagreements over religious and ethical views. However, the court should not be involved in such controversies and must rule strictly according to the law.
They stated that “the evidence before the court strongly shows that there will some families who will positively desire to have a baby, even though it will be born with severe disability,” they said. They said that it is clear that not all families will respond in the same way and that many families might not be able provide a supportive environment for a child with disabilities.
Judges also stated that “the evidence is clear that although scientific advances have improved and an earlier identification may be possible, there are still conditions that will only be diagnosed late in pregnancy, after 24 weeks.”
Crowter brought Crowter, 33-year-old Maire Lea Wilson, to the case. Maire has a daughter with Down syndrome and an unidentified baby with the condition.
She stated that she will appeal the decision.
Crowter, who was surrounded by supporters, said that “the fight is not over” outside the Royal Courts of Justice in central London.
“We are all subject to discrimination at school, work and in our society every day. She said that the verdict had allowed the judges to uphold discrimination in the womb as well.
Paul Conrathe, a lawyer representing the claimants from the firm, described the judgment as disappointing and “out-of-step with modern attitudes towards disability.”
He stated that “Births with Down syndrome can be aborted before birth unlike neurotypical babies. This law sends a strong message that the lives and dignity of those with Down syndrome are less important.”
