Matt Treacy ✒ Yesterday, October 27, marked the 55th anniversary of the granting of Royal Assent to the British 1967 Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act. 

28-October-2022

The provisions of that have subsequently been extended to Northern Ireland with the support and complicity of Sinn Féin and the SDLP.

Since that time there have been over ten million abortions carried out in England, Scotland and Wales. The annual figure is now over 200,000 compared to 35,000 in England and Wales in 1968.

The statistics for the first years of legalised abortion appeared to indicate that the number of illegal abortions – estimated at up to 200,000 by the Liberal MP David Steel whose private members bill formed the basis of the Act – had been grossly exaggerated.

Ending “back street” abortions and alleviating the pressures on working class families were the two main reasons given by those who spoke in favour of the legislation. Curiously, the current narrative that abortion is somehow part of the liberation of women was little rehearsed, in Westminster at least.

Nor was support for abortion a default option for all of the left. While only a small number of MPs voted against the Bill, it should be noted that among those who did support it was Margaret Thatcher, while several of the most powerful speeches opposing were given by left wing Labour MPs, two of them from Irish backgrounds.

One of these was Simon Mahon who was the Labour MP for Bootle who said that his previous support for abortion had ended when he had met the parents of one of the “subnormal children” whose destruction it was assured would help to make them more prosperous and happy. Mahon, who had been in the British army in World War II, pulled no punches in making the comparison between abortion and what that war had been about.



Another Labour MP, William Wells, stated that abortion “undermines respect for the sanctity of human life,” and dismissed as a canard the claim that it was part of creating a “progressive society.” Kevin McNamara, one of the few Labour MPs who consistently supported Irish unity, pointed out that the experience of other countries including Japan, Sweden and Hungary, was that legalising abortion did nothing – as was being claimed – to reduce the actual numbers of abortions.

The Labour MP for Pontypool in Wales, Leo Abse, declared that passing the Act would represent “a proclamation of defeat on behalf of the community,” and place them philosophically alongside “the great life deniers” of the National Socialists in Germany against whom he had fought. Referring to those on the left who regarded abortion as something to do with socialism, Abse said:

I am not impressed by the argument that because the rich do something stupid working class people should follow their example…. Some of my Friends should not think that they are waging the class struggle . . . 

While supporters avoided the triumphalist rhetoric of many of their later Irish imitators – including those TDs whose highpoint of their political careers was the copying of British abortion legislation – some of the key devices were similar. There was a focus, for example, on the danger to a woman’s life through the possibility of mental health issues leading to suicide.

Supporters within the general community both highlighted this and in many cases claimed that doctors would so rarely recommend an abortion on “mental health” grounds that the overall incidence of abortion would decline. Now of course, the vast majority of abortions in the UK are facilitated on that basis – so more than 9 million abortions have been carried out on that ground.

The main philosophical argument was typical of the liberal left of that period – and shared more cynically by utilitarian free market “conservatives” – was that aborting children likely to become a social burden would reduce both the pressure on working families and reduce the overall economic costs of supporting them.

I think the latter position, which was evidently shared by Thatcher and other Tories, was adequately answered by William F. Buckley in his response to libertarian novelist Ayn Rand’s support for abortion which led her to oppose Reagan because of his stated intent to curb the impact of Roe versus Wade. Buckley considered the Randian libertarian right’s support for abortion to be part of what he agreed with Whitaker Chambers was an “unfeeling meritocratic” individualism.

The left liberal position was best put by Dr. David Owen who was then a Labour MP and later leader of the Social Democratic Party. Owen clearly believed in something called “social medicine,” which was part of the “progressive and inevitable” improvement of humanity under the benign watch of societal engineers.

Owen claimed that legalising abortion would give doctors the power to deal with the problems which he claimed led to women seeking such a recourse, and that through the enlightened intervention of chaps such as himself and the promotion of better sex education and the greater availability of contraception, that maybe the incidence of abortion would actually be reduced.

Of course, Owen’s naïve belief in our capacity to “control the evolution of humanity” has been demonstrated to be a myth. Not least of all by the manner in which abortion has become in all too many cases not an option of last resort but, as Tory MP Jill Knight pointed out, something that would lead to a situation in which any woman who “felt that her coming baby would be an inconvenience would be able to get rid of it.”

The failure of the human race to live up to the expectations of the w-uld be moulders of a “person of a new type” is proof of Alexander Solzhenitsyn’s dictum that if human nature does change, and there is no evidence from history that it does, it evolves at a geological pace. A comparison of where Britain is now compared to where it was in 1967 offers no solace to those who would claim that abortion leads to a healthier society.

Of course those in Ireland who still believe as their counterparts have done for generations that adopting English “civility” is the way to do probably do not care. At least the proponents of abortion in Westminster made some sort of pitch that it was part of the brave new world that appeared possible back then. Their late imitators make no such claims, nor do they care about much other than ticking another box on their “progressive” bucket list.

Matt Treacy has published a number of books including histories of 
the Republican Movement and of the Communist Party of Ireland. 

Thatcher Supported Legalising Abortion In Britain ✑ While Many On The Left Were Opposed

Matt Treacy ✒ Yesterday, October 27, marked the 55th anniversary of the granting of Royal Assent to the British 1967 Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act. 

28-October-2022

The provisions of that have subsequently been extended to Northern Ireland with the support and complicity of Sinn Féin and the SDLP.

Since that time there have been over ten million abortions carried out in England, Scotland and Wales. The annual figure is now over 200,000 compared to 35,000 in England and Wales in 1968.

The statistics for the first years of legalised abortion appeared to indicate that the number of illegal abortions – estimated at up to 200,000 by the Liberal MP David Steel whose private members bill formed the basis of the Act – had been grossly exaggerated.

Ending “back street” abortions and alleviating the pressures on working class families were the two main reasons given by those who spoke in favour of the legislation. Curiously, the current narrative that abortion is somehow part of the liberation of women was little rehearsed, in Westminster at least.

Nor was support for abortion a default option for all of the left. While only a small number of MPs voted against the Bill, it should be noted that among those who did support it was Margaret Thatcher, while several of the most powerful speeches opposing were given by left wing Labour MPs, two of them from Irish backgrounds.

One of these was Simon Mahon who was the Labour MP for Bootle who said that his previous support for abortion had ended when he had met the parents of one of the “subnormal children” whose destruction it was assured would help to make them more prosperous and happy. Mahon, who had been in the British army in World War II, pulled no punches in making the comparison between abortion and what that war had been about.



Another Labour MP, William Wells, stated that abortion “undermines respect for the sanctity of human life,” and dismissed as a canard the claim that it was part of creating a “progressive society.” Kevin McNamara, one of the few Labour MPs who consistently supported Irish unity, pointed out that the experience of other countries including Japan, Sweden and Hungary, was that legalising abortion did nothing – as was being claimed – to reduce the actual numbers of abortions.

The Labour MP for Pontypool in Wales, Leo Abse, declared that passing the Act would represent “a proclamation of defeat on behalf of the community,” and place them philosophically alongside “the great life deniers” of the National Socialists in Germany against whom he had fought. Referring to those on the left who regarded abortion as something to do with socialism, Abse said:

I am not impressed by the argument that because the rich do something stupid working class people should follow their example…. Some of my Friends should not think that they are waging the class struggle . . . 

While supporters avoided the triumphalist rhetoric of many of their later Irish imitators – including those TDs whose highpoint of their political careers was the copying of British abortion legislation – some of the key devices were similar. There was a focus, for example, on the danger to a woman’s life through the possibility of mental health issues leading to suicide.

Supporters within the general community both highlighted this and in many cases claimed that doctors would so rarely recommend an abortion on “mental health” grounds that the overall incidence of abortion would decline. Now of course, the vast majority of abortions in the UK are facilitated on that basis – so more than 9 million abortions have been carried out on that ground.

The main philosophical argument was typical of the liberal left of that period – and shared more cynically by utilitarian free market “conservatives” – was that aborting children likely to become a social burden would reduce both the pressure on working families and reduce the overall economic costs of supporting them.

I think the latter position, which was evidently shared by Thatcher and other Tories, was adequately answered by William F. Buckley in his response to libertarian novelist Ayn Rand’s support for abortion which led her to oppose Reagan because of his stated intent to curb the impact of Roe versus Wade. Buckley considered the Randian libertarian right’s support for abortion to be part of what he agreed with Whitaker Chambers was an “unfeeling meritocratic” individualism.

The left liberal position was best put by Dr. David Owen who was then a Labour MP and later leader of the Social Democratic Party. Owen clearly believed in something called “social medicine,” which was part of the “progressive and inevitable” improvement of humanity under the benign watch of societal engineers.

Owen claimed that legalising abortion would give doctors the power to deal with the problems which he claimed led to women seeking such a recourse, and that through the enlightened intervention of chaps such as himself and the promotion of better sex education and the greater availability of contraception, that maybe the incidence of abortion would actually be reduced.

Of course, Owen’s naïve belief in our capacity to “control the evolution of humanity” has been demonstrated to be a myth. Not least of all by the manner in which abortion has become in all too many cases not an option of last resort but, as Tory MP Jill Knight pointed out, something that would lead to a situation in which any woman who “felt that her coming baby would be an inconvenience would be able to get rid of it.”

The failure of the human race to live up to the expectations of the w-uld be moulders of a “person of a new type” is proof of Alexander Solzhenitsyn’s dictum that if human nature does change, and there is no evidence from history that it does, it evolves at a geological pace. A comparison of where Britain is now compared to where it was in 1967 offers no solace to those who would claim that abortion leads to a healthier society.

Of course those in Ireland who still believe as their counterparts have done for generations that adopting English “civility” is the way to do probably do not care. At least the proponents of abortion in Westminster made some sort of pitch that it was part of the brave new world that appeared possible back then. Their late imitators make no such claims, nor do they care about much other than ticking another box on their “progressive” bucket list.

Matt Treacy has published a number of books including histories of 
the Republican Movement and of the Communist Party of Ireland. 

7 comments:

  1. I am neither in favour or oppossed to abortion, but am strongly a supporter of a womans right to choose. If she wishes to have a termination that is her right. Equally, if she chooses not to terminate she should not in any way be forced.
    Thatchers reasons were nothing to do with a womans right to chose, but more about being seen as in some way progressive which she most certainly was not. Privately Thatcher held fascist sympathies which is hardly progressive. Her reasons for suppprting "legalising abortion" and those of womens right to choose were
    totally different, as she admitted to be an opponent of feminism, aspecially the Marxist variant. As for the "liberal left" and the hypocritical right to life, perhaps they should ask how many women died or were geanalogically ruined for life after illegal "back street" abortions.

    Caoimhin O'Muraile

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Likewise, the decision to continue or not with a pregnancy must always reside with the woman. Male dominated legislatures, courts and churches have no business restricting abortion rights for women. For me as a humanist, enforced pregnancy and birth is a violation of one's property in person or bodily integrity just like slavery and corporal punishment. Those concerned about high abortion rates should be calling for free and easily contraception and universal child care. But as Anthony has said, if men could get pregnant then the patriarchy would be all for abortion on demand.

      Delete
    2. Caoimhin, I favour abortion not because I like it but because it is the fairest means of handling a complex situation. I imagine many of the women who have one do not like it either. When we think of how women suffered as a result of being denied it. Banning abortion is like banning alcohol. Simply does not work.
      Somebody always has to make a choice so who should it be? Has to be the pregnant person.
      Most opposition to abortion is based on religious grounds (Frankie is exempt from this as he doesn't give a fuck what the religious think) so I simply ignore it. I have often said I will listen to any argument against abortion other than a religious one. Ciaran Cunningham argued here once for abortion from a left wing perspective.
      Because abortion is not a pleasant experience the societal goal should be to have zero abortions. But we have to reach that point through methods other than coercion.

      Delete
  2. David Steele was less revealing and vocal about the systematic institutional abuse of kids of course........its sort of a given he would be all for abortion.

    ReplyDelete
  3. My two bits on abortion.........Apart from cases of rape or if the mother may die because her body rejects the baby and medical science can't help her body accept the invasion....Everything else is debatable. in the case of a fatal fetal abnormality or when the baby will only live for several mins to a few hours after birth, thats up the parents or single mother if the abortion is card is played....

    Everything else is off the table as far as I am concerned. There is no reason today in the 21st century (we are talking about The West/ Ireland) for any woman to wake up several weeks after she had unprotected with any man she cares to mention from her husband, her secret lover pregnant. Isn't that what the pill was invented for....to help prevent an unwanted pregnancy....Same for men....It is very easy to buy condoms to protect against pregnancy. Would any Quiller drive without a seat belt and take a chance?

    It is becoming 'abortion on demand' and yes Quillers Big Pharma make billions of US green backs each year because of abortions. That aside.......12 Men Share Their Abortion Stories.....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Frankie, those are your views which you are entitled to and which you have the right to live your life by. But you do not have the right to insist (as the majority of GOP candidates in the US mid term elections do) that the state and society enforce them. Because of the uniqueness of pregnancy to the lived experience of women, it has to be the woman's decision ultimately.

      Don't Big Pharma makes millions because of no end of medial treatments?

      Abortion is also a matter of conscience. No legislator should be coerced by party dictates into supporting abortion rights or an anti-abortion stance. Likewise no one working in obs and gynae should be coerced either way.

      Delete
  4. https://unherd.com/2022/06/the-left-killed-the-pro-choice-coalition/

    "Gone are the days when the Left took pains to emphasise that it was not pro-abortion, but against unwanted pregnancy; instead, this moderate stance has metastasised into a demonisation of pregnancy in general. Some have framed this as a look-what-you-made-me-do position forced by the anti-choice Right: “If there was ever anything beautiful about pregnancy, the anti-abortion movement has devoured it, and spat up something hateful in its place. Pregnancy, for many, will now end dreams, alter futures, maybe even kill,” writes New York Magazine‘s Sarah Jones."

    ReplyDelete