{"id":20002,"date":"2021-09-23T09:59:45","date_gmt":"2021-09-23T13:59:45","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/worldjusticenews.com\/news\/?p=20002"},"modified":"2021-09-23T09:59:45","modified_gmt":"2021-09-23T13:59:45","slug":"woman-with-downs-loses-abortion-law-fight","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/worldjusticenews.com\/news\/2021\/09\/23\/woman-with-downs-loses-abortion-law-fight\/","title":{"rendered":"Woman with Down’s loses abortion law fight"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n

A woman with Down’s syndrome has lost her High Court challenge over a law that allows abortion up to birth for a foetus with the condition.<\/b><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n

Heidi Crowter, 26, from Coventry, brought the case against the government in July, saying the legislation did not respect her life.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n

Her legal team had argued the rules were unlawfully discriminatory.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n

The government maintained there was no evidence the law discriminated against Down’s.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n

As two senior judges dismissed the case earlier, Ms Crowter said she would seek to appeal against the judgement, adding “the fight is not over”.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n

Under current legislation for England, Wales and Scotland, there is a 24-week time limit for abortion, unless “there is a substantial risk that if the child were born it would suffer from such physical or mental abnormalities as to be seriously handicapped”, which includes Down’s syndrome.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n

The judges found that section of the Abortion Act was not unlawful, and it aimed to strike a balance between the rights of the unborn child and of women.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n

Ms Crowter, who is married and campaigns under her maiden name, said: “We face discrimination every day in schools, in the work place and in society. And now thanks to this verdict the judges have upheld discrimination in the womb too.”<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n

She added on Twitter: “The judges might not think [the law] discriminates against me, the government might not think it discriminates against me, but I am telling you I feel discriminated against.”<\/p>\n

\n
\n

Lord Justice Singh and Mrs Justice Lieven said at the outset of their judgement: “The issues which have given rise to this claim are highly sensitive and sometimes controversial.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n

“This court cannot enter into those controversies; it must decide the case only in accordance with the law.”<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n

They said they had heard evidence showing some families would “positively wish to have a child” even knowing it would be born with severe disabilities.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n

But the judges also said there was clear evidence not every family would react the same way and the ability to provide for a disabled child would “vary significantly”.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n

They added while scientific developments had improved, some conditions would only be found late in a pregnancy, after 24 weeks.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n

The judges concluded the legislation was a matter for Parliament “which can take account of different interests and viewpoints, rather than in litigation”.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n
\"Maire<\/span><\/div>
M\u00e1ire Lea-Wilson (centre) brought the case with Heidi Crowter\u00a0 (Image: PA Media)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n
\n
\n

 <\/p>\n

Ms Crowter’s lawyers had claimed the legislation was unlawfully discriminatory as it was incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n

But at the hearing in July, the government said not only was there was no evidence of discrimination, provisions were in place to discourage it.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n

Speaking in the summer<\/a>, Ms Crowter said the law was offensive, and she wanted to challenge people’s perception of Down’s syndrome so that they saw “just a normal person”.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n

She also said then her stance was not a campaign against women’s right to choose.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n
\n