Complications from Abortions (Annual Report) Bill [HL]

Baroness Sugg Excerpts

2nd reading
Friday 13th December 2024 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Sugg (Con)]

My Lords, the goal of improving women’s healthcare through better access to information, particularly regarding potential complications of medical procedures, is indeed important. Access to information enables individuals to make informed choices and allows healthcare professionals to provide safer, more effective services. However, while I support the overall goal, I have concerns about legislating for an annual report in this manner.

First, as we have heard, it is important to emphasise that abortion is a safe and effective medical procedure and, in fact, can be safer than continuing a pregnancy to term. While any medical procedure carries some risks, those associated with abortion are well managed and women are fully informed of them by healthcare professionals, ensuring that they are equipped to make the best decision for their own health. I agree that improving this data collection is crucial. As highlighted by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, the lack of effective data has hindered innovation and improvement in women’s healthcare and, ultimately, the improvement of patient care. However, as we have heard, BPAS and the royal college have significant concerns about the Bill’s potential to exceptionalise and stigmatise abortion care.

Unlike other medical procedures, abortion would be singled out for mandatory complication reporting. No other procedure is subject to this. Doing so for abortion could create a false impression that it is uniquely dangerous. In reality, complications from abortion are rare—

[Lord Moylan (Con)]

It is already mandatory for complications from abortions to be reported. If that is exceptional, it is not made more so by this Bill. The question is from which data source one draws the reporting of those complications. They are reported and published every year by the department; this would not put a new requirement on abortion reporting.

--- Later in debate ---

[Baroness Sugg (Con)]

My Lords, as I say, I am very much in favour of ensuring that information is fully available, but I am concerned about having primary legislation singling out one medical procedure. It could promote fear and concern around women and make them feel as though they are not able to make their own choices around healthcare. It should be regulated like any other medical procedure. By treating it differently, we could add stigma. It is important to consider this in the wider context of the current politicisation of the abortion debate around the world.

We have heard about the difficulties of collating and collecting this data. Collating the current available data does not give an accurate picture. These issues were highlighted in the 2023 report. I would be interested to hear from the Minister about the department’s experience of collating the report: whether she thinks it is the best use of resources and indeed whether it led to any practical action that has improved healthcare.

The current reporting systems are far from perfect. We also have to be careful about when we link records, because that is not always desirable. Many women, especially those facing domestic violence or reproductive coercion, may not want their procedure recorded. Confidentiality is crucial for safety. A lack of privacy could deter women from seeking care, putting them at greater risk. For that reason, I cannot support the Bill as it stands.

I agree that improving data collection within women’s healthcare is essential, but that can be achieved in ways that respect privacy while improving care. The NHS 10-year plan and the women’s health strategy update offer a good opportunity to address these challenges effectively, without adding unnecessary legal burdens on the healthcare system. As we look to enhance women’s healthcare, we must proceed carefully and sensitively, balancing data collection with privacy and choice for women.