91¸£ÀûÉç

Aim and approach

9. Which of the following best expresses your view of the proposed Bill?

Please elaborate on your response.

• Fully supportive of the proposed Bill. We believe that access to safe healthcare provision is a fundamental human right that should be freely available to anyone. Further, the introduction of buffer zones would also support and protect the healthcare professionals involved in delivering abortion services to women. It is vital to understand that abortion is only one type of gynaecological healthcare provided by clinics, particularly in 91¸£ÀûÉç
• Being able to access abortion care is a fundamental part of gynaecological healthcare, which is a fundamental human right for all women; it has implications for their physical and psychological safety, as well as for their mental health. It is our view that these rights should overrule the right to protest/hold a vigil against abortion within a distance of less than 150 metres. Protests and vigils can be held anywhere and for any reason; they do not have to take place at a location where it could be detrimental to women who seek to access abortion care safely, exercising their right to safe healthcare provision, family planning and reproductive rights.

10. What is your view of the proposal for safe access zones being introduced at all healthcare settings that provide abortion services throughout Scotland?

• We fully support the proposal for safe access zones around all healthcare settings that provide abortion services throughout Scotland. If there is no blanket legislation covering all sites where abortion services are provided, there are considerable risks and implications for both women seeking to access abortion services and those healthcare professionals who provide them.
• On the one hand, if there is no legislation covering all healthcare settings, women seeking an abortion would be facing a ‘postcode lottery’ in terms of where they can access this type of healthcare. They may have to travel long distances to access support and care, sometimes between cities or local authorities. This poses considerable concerns for women who might not be able to travel in order to access abortion care due to financial difficulties, mobility issues or domestic abuse. A ‘selective approach’ would also likely increase the risk to women’s lives: a woman affected by domestic abuse might not be able to leave her home/neighbourhood/city to access abortion care; should her abusive partner find out that she accessed or sought to access an abortion, there is considerable likelihood that this could lead to an escalation in violence and abuse.
• We would also argue that a ‘selective approach’ would also have longer-term implications in the lives of healthcare professionals. It could be argued that many might choose to relocate or seek employment in an area where buffer zones are enforced, to avoid harassment by protestors or those holding vigils outside their place of work. This could potentially lead to a depletion of quality abortion services in parts of Scotland where buffer zones are not implemented, if healthcare professionals feel negatively impacted by the presence of protests or vigils outside their place of work.

11. What is your view of the proposal for the ‘precautionary’ approach to be used, in which a safe access zone is implemented outside every site which provides abortion services?

• We are fully supporting of the proposal to introduce a ‘precautionary’ approach. If abortion care is provided in settings that are not healthcare-based, then these settings should enjoy the same benefits

12. What is your view of the proposed standard size of a safe access zone being 150 metres around entrances to buildings which provide or house abortion services?

Please explain the reasons for your response:

• We fully support this proposal under the proviso as outlined on page 14 of the consultation document that Councils are able to extend these zones depending on the site area and advocate that the size of the buffer zone is a minimum of 150 metres.

13. What is your view of the proposal to ban all protests including both protests in support of and those in opposition to: A person’s decision to access abortion services (ie a woman having an abortion)?

• We fully support this proposal

14. What is your view of the proposal to ban all protests including both protests in support of and those in opposition to: A person’s decision to provide abortion services (ie a doctor, nurse, or midwife)?

• We are fully supportive of this proposal.
• No person has the right to protest for or against an individual’s decision to provide abortion services, in the same way that they have no right to protest for or against anyone’s decisions on their professional lives. The only exception to this would be where one’s professional career/decision infringes on the rights of others or is proven to demonstrate to wider societal harm.
• There should be no protests for or against anyone who chooses to provide abortion procedures, healthcare or counselling in the same way that there should be no protests for or against anyone who chooses to provide financial or building services.

15 What is your view of the proposal to ban all protests including both protests in support of and those in opposition to: A person’s decision to facilitate provision of abortion services (ie administrative or support staff)?

• Fully supportive.
• We don’t believe that there should be a right to protest against someone’s decision to provide services that facilitate women’s access to healthcare. However, we do believe that the right to protest in support of the provision of services that facilitate access to abortion should be upheld. This is because facilitating access to abortion services supports the human rights of women and ensures the negative impacts (if any) of having an abortion are minimised as much as possible through quality professional support.

16. Which types of activity – when done for the purposes of influencing a person’s decision to access healthcare settings including abortion services – do you consider should be banned in a safe access zone? (tick as many from the list as you consider should be covered by the Bill)

• All of the above.
• We would further add that the use of religious materials, imagery and quotes should be banned. Religion is often used as a key argument against abortion, often using arguments not based on scientific fact, which do not consider the individual circumstances that led to each woman’s decision to access abortion care in the first place.

17. What is your view on the potential punishments set out in the proposal for breach of a safe access zone (see pages 15 to 16 of the consultation document)? 

• Fully Supportive
• We feel that the potential punishments for the breach of a safe access are both necessary and proportional.

18. Do you think there are other ways in which the Bill’s aims could be achieved more effectively?

• Yes
• We believe that there should be accurate information in the public domain as to what an abortion procedure actually entails, how essential it is for women’s reproductive care, and education as to the reasons for which women seek to have an abortion. We believe that much of the anti-choice movement is based on a lack of understanding of women’s motivations and uses emotive and offensive language that parallels abortion to murder.
• Although we appreciate that this cannot be legislated, the Scottish Government can achieve improved education around abortion through resourcing and partnership work with local VAW Partnerships throughout Scotland.

Financial implications

19. Any new law can have a financial impact which would affect individuals, businesses, the public sector, or others. What financial impact do you think this proposal could have if it became law?

• We believe that this proposal would have no overall impact on costs.
• We believe that the only potential financial impact might be around initial communications and an officer’s time in identifying/marking boundaries and understanding the legislation; however, we do not anticipate that the increase in costs will be high enough to warrant additional considerations.

Equalities

20. Any new law can have an impact on different individuals in society, for example as a result of their age, disability, gender re-assignment, marriage and civil partnership status, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex or sexual orientation. What impact could this proposal have on particular people if it became law?

• Positive Impact
• We believe that the overall impact on groups with different protected characteristics will be positive. The only potential negative impact might be on the characteristics of religion or belief, as we would anticipate that anti-choice groups will argue that this bill infringes on their right to religious expression. However, it must also be considered that the religious expression of anti-choice protesters can also infringe on the religion or belief of women accessing abortion care who, in that instance are considerably more vulnerable. As such, we believe that overall the impact will be positive.

Sustainability

21. Any new law can impact on work to protect and enhance the environment, achieve a sustainable economy, and create a strong, healthy, and just society for future generations. Do you think the proposal could impact in any of these areas?

• Yes
• We believe that any measure that promotes human rights, in this case women’s rights, helps to create a strong, healthy and just society for future generations. This is in line with both Equally Safe: Scotland’s Strategy for preventing and eradicating violence against women and girls, as well as a number of National Outcomes outlined in the National Performance Framework. Specifically:
  • Children and Young People
  • Health
  • Poverty
  • Human Rights

General

22. Do you have any other additional comments or suggestions on the proposed Bill (which have not already been covered in any of your responses to earlier questions)?

• The City of 91¸£ÀûÉç Council is a key stakeholder in the Equally Safe 91¸£ÀûÉç Committee (ESEC – 91¸£ÀûÉç’s inter-agency Violence Against Women Partnersip). The ESEC comprises members from Police Scotland, the NHS and the third sector and seeks to implement the Equally Safe Strategy across 91¸£ÀûÉç.
• The introduction of buffer zones would support the implementation of Equally Safe both in 91¸£ÀûÉç as well as the rest of Scotland. Specifically, out of the four priorities of the Equally Safe Strategy, this bill would support:
  • Outcome 1: Scottish Society embraces equality and mutual respect and rejects all forms of violence against women and girls.
  • Outcome 2: Women and girls thrive as equal citizens- socially, culturally, economically and politically
  • Outcome 3: Interventions are early and effective, preventing violence and maximising the safety and wellbeing of women, children and young people.