An English woman and a child with Down’s syndrome on Friday lost an appeal challenging Britain’s abortion law that allows babies with the syndrome to be aborted up until birth.
Three judges at the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, saying the abortion law does not interfere with the rights of the living disabled.
One of the appellants, Heidi Crowter, said the judgment told her she is “not valued and of much less value than a person without Down’s Syndrome.”
She said she may take her case to the supreme court.
In England, Wales, and Scotland, there is a 24-week time limit on having an abortion.
Crowter, 27, who is now known by her married name Heidi Carter, brought the challenge against the Department of Health and Social Care in June 2020 with Aidan Lea-Wilson—a boy with Down’s syndrome, and his mother Maire Lea-Wilson.
They claimed the abortion law interfered with unborn children’s right to life, as well as the living disabled’s right to have respect for their private lives and not be discriminated against—rights they say are protected under articles 2, 3, 8, and 14 of the European Convention.
They lost the case on both grounds and were not permitted to appeal on the first ground “because the law is clear that the ECHR [European Convention on Human Rights] does not grant rights to the unborn.
As a result, Maire could not be one of the appellants and only acted as her son Aidan’s litigation friend.
Appealing the high court’s decision, Jason Coppell KC, representing Crowter and Lea-Wilson, told the court in July: “Its effect is to stereotype life as a disabled, or seriously handicapped, person as not worth living and certainly as having less value than life as an able-bodied person, thereby impacting on the feelings of self-worth and self-confidence of disabled persons, such as Ms. Crowter.”
He said the language used in the Act is outmoded and considered by some to be offensive and unacceptable.
“The court recognises that many people with Down’s Syndrome and other disabilities will be upset and offended by the fact that a diagnosis of serious disability during pregnancy is treated by the law as a justification for termination, and that they may regard it as implying that their own lives are of lesser value,” the summary reads.
“But it holds that a perception that that is what the law implies is not by itself enough to give rise to an interference with article 8 rights (to private and family life, enshrined in the European Convention on Human Rights),” it added.
She said she plans to take the case to the Supreme Court and hopefully, party with her friends.
