Holyrood will seek backing from public on proposals to allow abortions ‘up to birth’
The Scottish Government is preparing to launch a public consultation on recommendations from a review that could allow abortions up to birth in Scotland, though ministers say no legislation will be introduced during the current parliamentary year. The proposals stem from a review commissioned last year by former First Minister Humza Yousaf, and any eventual changes could significantly increase the number of terminations carried out, making this a highly sensitive issue for both healthcare policy and public opinion.
Public Health Secretary Maree Todd confirmed the consultation would fulfil a 2026 manifesto commitment but stressed that law reform is complex and requires extensive engagement with stakeholders before any decisions are made. Currently, abortion is legal before 24 weeks with the agreement of two doctors on specific grounds, but the review proposed removing this requirement, permitting terminations up to birth with sign-off from two doctors or nurses, and fully decriminalising abortion. The Society for the Protection of the Unborn Child criticised the plans as potentially creating one of the world's most extreme abortion laws, urging First Minister John Swinney to reject the proposals, while the government's chief medical officer has separately called for more consistent abortion service provision across health boards.
In short
- Scottish Government to consult public on allowing abortions up to birth
- No legislation planned for this parliamentary year, minister says
- Anti-abortion group urges First Minister to reject the proposals
Steelman: both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Supporters, including many clinicians and women's health advocates, argue that abortion is fundamentally a healthcare matter and should be governed by medical judgement rather than criminal law, noting that terminations after 24 weeks are already exceedingly rare and typically involve severe fetal anomalies or grave risk to the woman's life. They contend that decriminalisation protects women from prosecution in tragic, complex circumstances such as miscarriage or premature labour, and that trusting two doctors or nurses to make sensitive decisions on a case-by-case basis is more humane and practical than a rigid legal cut-off. For them, this reform reflects compassion, clinical trust and bodily autonomy rather than a desire to increase late terminations.
The case against
Opponents, including faith groups, disability advocates and some medical professionals, argue that removing a firm time limit undermines the principle that unborn life gains moral and legal weight as pregnancy progresses, and that permitting terminations up to birth risks Scotland adopting one of the most permissive regimes in the world. They fear the change could weaken safeguards intended to protect vulnerable women from coercion, reduce the moral seriousness attached to late-stage decisions, and shift practice without sufficient parliamentary scrutiny or public consensus. For them, this is a matter of protecting the unborn, maintaining meaningful legal boundaries and ensuring such a significant ethical shift is not made without robust democratic debate.
Explained simply
In Scotland, abortion is currently legal up to 24 weeks when two doctors agree that specific legal grounds are met. The rules also set out who can approve a termination and when it may take place.
A review commissioned by former First Minister Humza Yousaf proposed changing those rules, including removing the two-doctor requirement and decriminalising abortion. Public Health Secretary Maree Todd and First Minister John Swinney are among the ministers involved in considering the issue; the Society for the Protection of the Unborn Child has criticised the proposals.
The debate concerns how abortion law should balance access to healthcare, professional oversight and legal limits. Any change would affect patients and the health services that provide care, as well as remain a matter of public debate.