The Crown Prosecution Service has decided not to pursue charges against two doctors who agreed to perform abortions on the grounds of the gender of an unborn child.
Lord Steel who introduced the 1967 abortion legislation has described abortion on the grounds of gender as “wholly repugnant”. Baroness Knight said that in 1967 no-one would have “dreamt that it was necessary to put an amendment down to protect girl babies.”
How significant again is the use of language: Baroness Knight identifies what lives inside the womb as a “baby” – and she is entirely right to do so. But imagine that she had talked instead of “a non-male foetus”: it feels so different, doesn’t it?
What, then, about an amendment “to protect handicapped children”: this is what a civilised and caring society does. Lord Steel says “Gender selection in abortion is wholly repugnant.” Isn’t the selection by handicap pretty awful too?