Rex v Bourne

Last updated

Rex v Bourne
Coat of arms of the United Kingdom (1901-1952).svg
Court Old Bailey
Decided19 July 1938
Citation(s)[1939] 1 KB 687
Court membership
Judge(s) sitting Sir Malcolm Macnaghten

Rex v Bourne, The King v Aleck Bourne, or the Bourne Judgment, was a British landmark court case in 1938 relating to an abortion performed by obstetric surgeon Aleck Bourne on a 14-year-old girl who had become pregnant as a result of being raped. The judge directed the jury towards the concept that situations arise where abortion might protect the health of the mother. Bourne was found not guilty of performing the procedure unlawfully and the judgment set the precedence for several subsequent abortion cases and the Abortion Act 1967 (UK).

Contents

Seeking a termination of her pregnancy in May 1938, the girl came to the attention of Bourne, who had been awaiting such a case to test in the courts. He admitted her to St Mary's Hospital in June, informed authorities of his intention to perform the operation, carried it out, and then asked to be arrested.

Charged under section 58 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 for procuring an abortion, it was decided that the case should go to trial at the Old Bailey before a judge and jury. With the term "unlawful" added to the charge, the trial took place on 18 and 19 July 1938. The prosecution was led by Donald Sumervell, while Bourne was defended by Mr G. A. Thesiger and Roland Oliver. In his direction, the judge Sir Malcolm Macnaghten, asked the jury to answer not the question of whether Bourne performed the operation in good faith to preserve the girl's life, but whether Bourne's actions were "not done in good faith for the purpose only of preserving the life of the girl." [1] [2] It took the jury 40 minutes to come to the verdict that Bourne was not guilty.

The trial received widespread interest from the public, medical professionals and legal establishments.

Background

The Offences Against the Person Act 1861 made it illegal to perform an abortion. [3] [lower-alpha 1] Between 1861 and 1938, some therapeutic indications for terminating a pregnancy were found in medical textbooks, though where that stood in law was unclear; the issue of what might be a lawful reason to perform an abortion had not been tested in court. [5] By 1920, the procedure was generally safe when performed by trained professionals. [5] However, prosecutions for conducting abortions were common, particularly of medically untrained women who carried out the unsafe procedure for a small fee. [6]

Aleck Bourne was a reputable obstetrician at St Mary's Hospital, London, and visiting consultant at Queen Charlotte's Maternity Hospital, London, who pushed for reforms in abortion law, and performed the procedure without fee. [7] Five years before the 1938 trial, Bourne had successfully stood by a Dr Avarne, who had been accused by pathologist Sir Bernard Spilsbury of performing an illegal abortion. [5] The following year in 1934 he was appointed to the British Medical Association (BMA) Committee on the Medical Aspects of Abortion. [5] Its report, published in 1936, included indications for performing an abortion for therapeutic reasons, one of which was for mental ill-health. [5] It noted that an abortion might prevent psychological stress in an underage girl pregnant by rape. [5] Subsequently, for the purpose of testing the issue in court, Bourne awaited such a case to come his way. [8]

Facts

On 27 April 1938, a 14-year-old girl had been raped by a group of Royal guardsmen at Horse Guards Parade near Whitehall and the assailants were subsequently sentenced at the Old Bailey. [5] [8] [lower-alpha 2]

In May 1938, the girl attended St Thomas' Hospital, where after confirming that she was pregnant, was refused an abortion and was turned away. [10] Through the Schools Care Committee, the girl came to the attention of Joan Malleson, a physician and member of the medico-legal counsel of the Abortion Law Reform Association (ALRA). [8] Malleson in turn wrote to Bourne for assistance. [8] [11]

Bourne saw the girl and her mother on 31 May. [8] She was admitted to St Mary's on 6 June. [8] On 14 June, he openly performed a termination of pregnancy. [6] He had informed the police of his intent prior to the procedure, and afterwards asked to be arrested. [10] Subsequently he was charged under section 58 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861. [2] [10]

Marylebone Police Court

Bourne leaving Marylebone Police Court (1 July 1938) Aleck Bourne Marylebone 1938.png
Bourne leaving Marylebone Police Court (1 July 1938)

On 1 July, Bourne was called to Marylebone Police Court, where in front of magistrate Mr Ivan E. Snell, Mr G. A. Thesiger of the London and Counties Medical Protection Society took to his defence. [8] The Director of Public Prosecutions was represented by H. A. K. Morgan. [8]

Prosecution

Morgan noted the case to be far from usual in that a well respected surgeon openly broke the law for reasons he thought good, and in so doing risked his own life imprisonment. [8] On finding an underage girl pregnant by rape, Bourne had found his perfect case. [8] Morgan clarified that on missing her period the girl was taken to Malleson. [8] Malleson requested advice from Bourne, who in turn replied "I shall be delighted to take her in at St Mary's and curette her ... I will write to the attorney general and invite him to take action". [8] After seeing the girl and receiving a letter of consent from her father, Bourne informed Dr P. C. F. Wingate, his resident obstetric officer, about the case. [8] At admission, a pregnancy test was positive and she was observed until the eighth day when Bourne noted her to have a nervous breakdown. [10] It was then that Bourne confirmed to go ahead with the procedure to "empty her uterus", and this was carried out on 14 June. [10] Later that day, when Chief Inspector Bridger went to interview him, Bourne responded by saying "I want you to arrest me." [8] [12]

The girl's name was not revealed in court and Morgan assured the court that she would face no charges herself. [8] Her father confirmed that he gave written consent to Bourne on 31 May, but asked to keep it a private matter. [8] Malleson confirmed she knew Bourne in a professional manner and that she received two letters from him in response to hers. [8] Also cautioned was Wingate. [8] He confirmed the story, adding that he attended the abortion on 14 June, which was carried out under aseptic conditions and that she had been looked after by qualified medical staff. [8]

Defence

Thesiger advised Bourne to plead "not guilty". [8] He informed the court of how the law stood on the matter of abortion, and reiterated the crime against the girl; one man had sexual intercourse with her while the other held her down. [8] Thesiger clarified that the girl and her parents consented to the abortion, the surgeon was highly qualified and the conditions for the procedure was as safe as could be. [8] He argued that Bourne attempted to avert the consequences of a wrong doing and could not possibly be unlawful in his actions. [8] He pointed out that the 1861 Act mentioned the word "unlawful" four times, an unnecessary entry unless the law intended that there may be situations where the procedure would not be "unlawful". [3] [8] He called for the case to be dismissed. [8]

Magistrate's decision

The conclusion was that Bourne was to pay £100 in bail and go to trial at the Central Criminal Court before a judge and jury. [8] Snell pointed out that this decision was likely agreeable with Bourne himself. [8]

Proceedings in the Old Bailey

Aleck Bourne on his way to the Old Bailey 19 July 1938 Aleck Bourne Old Bailey.png
Aleck Bourne on his way to the Old Bailey 19 July 1938

Bourne was "charged under the Offences against the Person Act 1861, s. 58, that he unlawfully procured the abortion of a girl aged about 15 years". [2] [lower-alpha 3] The trial took place at the Old Bailey on 18 and 19 July 1938. [1]

Two women and 10 men made up the jury. [14] The judge was Sir Malcolm Macnaghten. [1] [2] Attorney General Donald Sumervell, L. A. Byrne and Henry Elam represented the prosecution, while Bourne was defended by Thesiger and Roland Oliver. [2]

Oliver began with explaining that the case depended on the meaning of "unlawful" and with agreement of the judge and prosecution, asked that if any members of the jury had strong opinions that all abortions were unlawful then they should step down; none did. [1] [15]

Prosecution

Malleson wrote to Bourne that the response of the consultant at St Thomas’s was that, "the rapists were officers and therefore apparently gentlemen". [6]

Bourne admitted that his experience of seeing the dangers of underage girls going through pregnancy did bias his opinion in this case, though it was performed in what was the agreed safest conditions at that time. [15] He felt that though he felt certain himself of what was meant by "therapeutic", he acknowledged that fears among his colleagues of performing abortions for therapeutic reasons resulted in many women resorting to dangerous backstreet procedures. [1] [15] His intent was to observe her over a period of time. [15] Bourne noted that the girl was "not mentally defective" and "not of the prostitute type". [6] Unable to differentiate between danger to life and danger to health, Bourne felt abortion was justified to protect both her physical and mental health. [6] Bourne clarified that he performed the operation to save health and preserve life, not to save life. [6]

Defence

Witnesses included Lord Horder. [10] He agreed with Bourne. [13] William Gilliatt, an eminent gynaecologist assured the court of Bourne's competence in both deciding on a suitable case and performing the operation, and if put in similar situation he would have done the same. [1]

In the evidence of police surgeon, Jacob A. Gorsky, his examination findings from 27 April found the girl distressed with physical signs consistent with "violence and rape". [1] The opinion of psychiatrist, J. R. Rees, was that the state of the mind was intertwined with the physical state, and if asked if he would advise abortion in this girl's case, he said he would certainly agree on the grounds of the severity of the sexual assault and her young age. [1] The outcome of leaving her as she was would be similar to that of shell shock, he told the court. [1]

Direction and verdict

Judge Sir Malcolm Macnaghten SirMalcolmMacnaghten.jpg
Judge Sir Malcolm Macnaghten

If the doctor is of the opinion, on reasonable grounds and with adequate knowledge, that the probable consequence of the continuance of the pregnancy will be to make the woman a physical or mental wreck, the jury are entitled to take the view that the doctor is operating for the purpose of preserving the life of the mother...Macnaghten [7] [16]

Macnaghten asked the jury to answer not the question of whether Bourne performed the operation in good faith to preserve the girl's life, but whether Bourne's actions were "not done in good faith for the purpose only of preserving the life of the girl." [1] [2] He stated that performing an abortion might protect the health of the mother by preventing a "physical or mental wreck". [7] [16]

Macnaghten drew upon the wording of the Infant Life (Preservation) Act 1929 and whether the procedure is "done in good faith for the purpose of preserving the life of the mother". [2] [17] He recommended that the jury be prejudiced by the testimonies of Gorsky and Rees, and consider the girl's age, dangers of delivering a baby before physical maturity, and mental effect of the crime of rape of a child. [2] He reminded them that this case involved a girl not of "the prostitute class". [2] He used the analogy of not immediately operating on a child with appendicitis to save life, contrast to be watchful waiting and operating with risk of death once the appendix perforates. [2] "Do it, and do it now. Do it while it is still safe to do it. Do not wait to see whether she is near death." [2] "The unborn child in the womb must not be destroyed unless the destruction of that child is for the purpose of preserving the yet more precious life of the mother", he said. [2]

It took the jury 40 minutes to come to the verdict of "Not Guilty". [1]

Response

Dubbed "the case of the horse with a green tail", the assault on the girl in April 1938 received widespread media coverage in England. [5] Subsequently, the trial relating to the abortion received extensive interest from the public, medical professionals and legal establishments. [5] [18] On hearing the verdict, members at a BMA conference cheered at the news. [19]

The judgment gave physicians the authority to decide on the eligibility of a woman requesting an abortion. [14] However, illegal backstreet abortions continued for most seeking a termination of pregnancy unless a safer private clinic could be afforded. [6] [20] [21] The case had come to be known as the "Bourne Judgment" and set the precedence in several subsequent abortion cases. [22]

In 1945, Bourne resigned from the ALRA and co-founded the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children. [23] To Bourne's disappointment the case was used in the construction of the Abortion Act of 1967, which he criticized for being lax, saying that "I would not have it believed that I have worked for a loose interpretation of the law", and in his opinion would result in "the greatest holocaust in history". [6] [23] The Abortion Act 1967 recognised abortion as legal if two registered medical practitioners agreed that "the continuance of the pregnancy would involve risk to the life of the pregnant woman, or of injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman, or any existing children of her family". [16] [lower-alpha 4]

See also

Notes

  1. ↑ Section 58 stated possible life imprisonment for a person deliberately causing a miscarriage. [4]
  2. ↑ Two of the guards were found guilty at the Old Bailey on 28 June 1938. The judge was Justice du Parcq. The girl had stated that she was a clerkess and was lured by the offer to see a horse with a green tail. [9]
  3. ↑ The word "unlawful" was added to the indictment at the request of Oliver. [13]
  4. ↑ By the mid-1960s unsafe abortion was the leading cause of avoidable maternal deaths. [24]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Abortion in the United Kingdom</span> Overview of the legality and prevalence of abortions in the United Kingdom

Abortion in the United Kingdom is de facto available under the terms of the Abortion Act 1967 in Great Britain and the Abortion (No.2) Regulations 2020 in Northern Ireland. The procurement of an abortion remains a criminal offence in Great Britain under the Offences Against the Person Act 1861, although the Abortion Act provides a legal defence for both the pregnant woman and her doctor in certain cases. Although a number of abortions did take place before the 1967 Act, there have been around 10 million abortions in the United Kingdom. Around 200,000 abortions are carried out in England and Wales each year and just under 14,000 in Scotland; the most common reason cited under the ICD-10 classification system for around 98% of all abortions is "risk to woman's mental health."

Abortion in Ireland is regulated by the Health Act 2018. Abortion is permitted in Ireland during the first twelve weeks of pregnancy, and later in cases where the pregnant woman's life or health is at risk, or in the cases of a fatal foetal abnormality. Abortion services commenced on 1 January 2019, following its legalisation by the aforementioned Act, which became law on 20 December 2018. Previously, the 8th Constitutional Amendment had given the life of the unborn foetus the same value as that of its mother, but the 36th constitutional amendment, approved by referendum in May 2018, replaced this with a clause permitting the Oireachtas (parliament) to legislate for the termination of pregnancies.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Abortion in Canada</span> Overview of the legality and prevalence of abortions in Canada

Abortion in Canada is legal throughout pregnancy and is publicly funded as a medical procedure under the combined effects of the federal Canada Health Act and provincial health-care systems. However, access to services and resources varies by region. While some restrictions exist, Canada is one of the few nations with no criminal restrictions on abortion. Abortion is subject to provincial healthcare regulatory rules and guidelines for physicians. No provinces offer abortion on request at 24 weeks and beyond, although there are exceptions for certain medical complications.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Abortion law</span> Laws that allow, prohibit, or regulate abortion

Abortion laws vary widely among countries and territories, and have changed over time. Such laws range from abortion being freely available on request, to regulation or restrictions of various kinds, to outright prohibition in all circumstances. Many countries and territories that allow abortion have gestational limits for the procedure depending on the reason; with the majority being up to 12 weeks for abortion on request, up to 24 weeks for rape, incest, or socioeconomic reasons, and more for fetal impairment or risk to the woman's health or life. As of 2022, countries that legally allow abortion on request or for socioeconomic reasons comprise about 60% of the world's population.

Abortion in Sweden was first legislated by the Abortion Act of 1938. This stated that an abortion could be legally performed in Sweden upon medical, humanitarian, or eugenical grounds. That is, if the pregnancy constituted a serious threat to the woman's life, if she had been impregnated by rape, or if there was a considerable chance that any serious condition might be inherited by her child, she could request an abortion. The law was later augmented in 1946 to include socio-medical grounds and again in 1963 to include the risk of serious fetal damage. A committee investigated whether these conditions were met in each individual case and, as a result of this prolonged process, abortion was often not granted until the middle of the second trimester. As such, a new law was created in 1974, stating that the choice of an abortion is entirely up to the woman until the end of the 18th week.

Therapeutic Abortion Committees were committees established under the Canadian Criminal Code. Each committee consisted of three medical doctors who would decide whether a request for an abortion fit within the exception to the criminal offence of procuring a miscarriage, i.e. performing an abortion. The Criminal Code only permitted lawful abortion if continuation of a pregnancy would cause a woman medical harm, as certified by a TAC. The TACs were almost always composed of men, due to fewer women practicing medicine and even fewer having these types of high level positions. These restrictions on abortion were struck down as unconstitutional by the Supreme Court of Canada in its decision in R v Morgentaler in 1988.

<i>Attorney General v X</i> Irish court case permitting abortion in exceptional circumstances

Attorney General v X, [1992] IESC 1; [1992] 1 IR 1, was a landmark Irish Supreme Court case which established the right of Irish women to an abortion if a pregnant woman's life was at risk because of pregnancy, including the risk of suicide.

Murder is an offence under the common law of England and Wales. It is considered the most serious form of homicide, in which one person kills another with the intention to cause either death or serious injury unlawfully. The element of intentionality was originally termed malice aforethought, although it required neither malice nor premeditation. Baker, chapter 14 states that many killings done with a high degree of subjective recklessness were treated as murder from the 12th century right through until the 1974 decision in DPP v Hyam.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">History of abortion</span>

The practice of induced abortion—the deliberate termination of a pregnancy—has been known since ancient times. Various methods have been used to perform or attempt abortion, including the administration of abortifacient herbs, the use of sharpened implements, the application of abdominal pressure, and other techniques. The term abortion, or more precisely spontaneous abortion, is sometimes used to refer to a naturally occurring condition that ends a pregnancy, that is, to what is popularly called a miscarriage. But in what follows the term abortion will always refer to an induced abortion.

<i>R v Davidson</i> 1969 Supreme Court of Victoria ruling

R v Davidson, also known as the Menhennitt ruling, was a significant ruling delivered in the Supreme Court of Victoria on 26 May 1969. It concerned the legality of abortion in the Australian state of Victoria. The ruling was not the end of the case, but rather answered certain questions of law about the admissibility of evidence, so as to allow the trial to proceed.

Joan Graeme Malleson was an English physician, specialist in contraception and prominent advocate of the legalisation of abortion.

Aleck William Bourne was a prominent British gynaecologist and writer, known for his 1938 trial, a landmark case, in which he was prosecuted for performing a termination of pregnancy on a 14-year-old rape victim. He was subsequently charged with procuring an illegal abortion but was acquitted. He later became an anti-abortion activist.

In Trinidad and Tobago, abortion is illegal save for few exceptions. The respective laws are in place since 1925.

Child destruction is the name of a statutory offence in England and Wales, Northern Ireland, Hong Kong and in some parts of Australia.

Abortion in Zimbabwe is available under limited circumstances. Zimbabwe's current abortion law, the Termination of Pregnancy Act, was enacted by Rhodesia's white minority government in 1977. The law permits abortion if the pregnancy endangers the life of the woman or threatens to permanently impair her physical health, if the child may be born with serious physical or mental defects, or if the fetus was conceived as a result of rape or incest. Nevertheless, an estimated 70,000+ illegal abortions are performed in Zimbabwe each year, resulting in around 20,000 maternal deaths.

Foeticide, or feticide, is the act of killing a fetus, or causing a miscarriage. Definitions differ between legal and medical applications, whereas in law, feticide frequently refers to a criminal offense, in medicine the term generally refers to a part of an abortion procedure in which a provider intentionally induces fetal demise to avoid the chance of an unintended live birth, or as a standalone procedure in the case of selective reduction.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Abortion-rights movements</span> Social movement advocating for legal access to abortion

Abortion-rights movements, also self-styled as pro-choice movements, advocate for the right to have legal access to induced abortion services including elective abortion. They seek to represent and support women who wish to terminate their pregnancy without fear of legal or social backlash. These movements are in direct opposition to anti-abortion movements.

Abortion in Uganda is illegal unless performed by a licensed medical doctor in a situation where the woman's life is deemed to be at risk.

Abortion law in Saint Kitts and Nevis, a country in the West Indies and a member of the Commonwealth of Nations, is modelled on British legislation. Abortion is permitted in circumstances where a woman's life is threatened by pregnancy.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Termination of Pregnancy Act (Zimbabwe)</span>

The Termination of Pregnancy Act is a law in Zimbabwe governing abortion. Enacted in 1977 by the Parliament of Rhodesia and effective starting 1 January 1978, it was retained after Zimbabwe's independence in 1980. The law expanded abortion access, permitting it under three circumstances: if the pregnancy endangers the life of the woman or threatens to permanently impair her physical health, if the child may be born with serious physical or mental defects, or if the fetus was conceived as a result of rape or incest.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 "Charge Of Procuring Abortion" . The British Medical Journal. 2 (4046): 199–205. 23 July 1938. ISSN   0007-1447. JSTOR   20300173.
  2. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Macnaghten, J. (1939). Rex v. Bourne (18–19 July 1938) (PDF). Central Criminal Court.
  3. 1 2 "Offences against the Person Act 1861: 58. Administering drugs or using instruments to procure abortion". Legislation.gov.uk. The National Archives. Archived from the original on 18 September 2023. Retrieved 17 September 2023.
  4. ↑ Harte, Colin (2005). "Appendix A. The UK abortion law prior to the 1967 Abortion Act". Changing Unjust Laws Justly: Pro-Life Solidarity with "The Last and Least". Cambridge University Press. pp. 335–336. ISBN   978-0-8132-1406-1.
  5. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Brookes, Barbara; Roth, Paul (1994). "13. Rex v. Bourne and the medicalisation of abortion". In Clark, Michael; Crawford, Catherine (eds.). Legal Medicine in History. Cambridge University Press. pp. 314–343. ISBN   0-521-39514-3.
  6. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 de Costa, Caroline M. (17 August 2009). "The King versus Aleck Bourne" (PDF). The Medical Journal of Australia. 191 (4): 230–231. doi:10.5694/j.1326-5377.2009.tb02762.x. ISSN   0025-729X. PMID   19705987. S2CID   77252005.
  7. 1 2 3 Chamberlain, Geoffrey (2007). "7. Early modern history 1901-1945". From Witchcraft to Wisdom: A History of Obstetrics and Gynaecology in the British Isles. London: Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. p. 204. ISBN   978-1-904752-14-1.
  8. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 "Medico-Legal". British Medical Journal. 2 (4044): 97–98. 9 July 1938. ISSN   0007-1447. PMC   2210068 .
  9. ↑ "Troopers guilty: offence against a young girl, sentence pending second trial". Edinburgh Evening News. 28 June 1938. p. 7.
  10. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Gleeson, Kate (2011). "16. The strange case of the invisible woman in abortion law reform". In Jones, Jackie; Grear, Anna; Fenton, Rachel Anne; Stevenson, Kim (eds.). Gender, Sexualities and Law. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge. ISBN   978-0-415-57439-6.
  11. ↑ Haigh, Gideon (2008). "Not a fit subject for debate". The Racket: How Abortion Became Legal In Australia. Melbourne Univ. Publishing. ISBN   978-0-522-85912-6.
  12. ↑ Alghrani, Amel; Bennett, Rebecca; Ost, Suzanne (2013). "1. Courtrooms, "physic" and drama". Bioethics, Medicine, and the Criminal Law. Cambridge University Press. pp. 27–29. ISBN   978-1-107-01825-9.
  13. 1 2 "London surgeon on trial: why he operated on girl". Edinburgh Evening News. 18 July 1938. p. 7.
  14. 1 2 Hull, N. E. H.; Hoffer, Peter Charles (2021). "2. Abortion and birth control (1900-1965)". Roe v. Wade: The Abortion Rights Controversy in American History, Third Updated Edition. University Press of Kansas. pp. 58–59. ISBN   978-0-7006-3194-0.
  15. 1 2 3 4 Grubb, Andrew (1990). "Abortion Law in England: The Medicalization of a Crime" . Law, Medicine and Health Care. 18 (1–2): 146–161. doi:10.1111/j.1748-720X.1990.tb01143.x. ISSN   0277-8459. PMID   2197511. S2CID   40784311.
  16. 1 2 3 Crook, Sarah (June 2020). "'A disastrous blow': psychiatric risk, social indicators and medical authority in abortion reform in post-war Britain". Medical Humanities. 46 (2): 124–134. doi:10.1136/medhum-2018-011561. ISSN   1468-215X. PMC   7402462 . PMID   31147447.
  17. ↑ Davies, Christie (2017). "2. The strange death of moralist Britain". The Strange Death of Moral Britain. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge. ISBN   978-1-4128-0622-0.
  18. ↑ Durand, R. W. (1938). "Abortion: Medical Aspects of Rex v. Bourne" . The Modern Law Review. 2 (3): 236–239. ISSN   0026-7961. JSTOR   1090592.
  19. ↑ "Surgeon found not guilty: judge advises jury to take reasonable view of the law". The Scotsman. 20 July 1938. p. 14.
  20. ↑ Halfmann, Drew (2019). "Political Institutions and the Comparative Medicalization of Abortion" . Journal of Health and Social Behavior. 60 (2): 138–152. doi:10.1177/0022146519843935. ISSN   0022-1465. JSTOR   48588699. PMID   31023092. S2CID   133606679.
  21. ↑ von Rosenberg, Ingrid (2012). "6. The most private/public affair. Discourses on birth and family from the 19th century to the present". In Pankratz, Anette; Viol, Claus-Ulrich; Waal, Ariane de (eds.). Birth and Death in British Culture: Liminality, Power, and Performance. Newcastle Upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. ISBN   978-1-4438-3888-7.
  22. ↑ Robinson, Kenneth (10 February 1961). "Parliamentary Debates (Hansard).: House of Commons official report: Medical Termination Of Pregnancy Bill". hansard.parliament.uk. London: H.M. Stationery Office (Great Britain Parliament House of Commons). pp. 856–857. Retrieved 21 September 2023.
  23. 1 2 Engel, Jacky. "Abortion Law Reform". cmf.org.uk. Christian Medical Fellowship. Archived from the original on 22 September 2023. Retrieved 22 September 2023.
  24. ↑ Brooke, Stephen (2002). Kandiah, Michael D.; Staerk, Gillian (eds.). The Abortion Act 1967 (seminar held 10 July 2001) (PDF). London: Institute of Contemporary British History. pp. 15–16. ISBN   1-871348-75-7.

Further reading

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.