UK Supreme Court rejects free abortions for UK citizens in Northern Ireland

The UK Supreme Court has rejected an appeal by a mother and daughter in their legal battle for women from Northern Ireland to receive free abortions on the National Health Service (NHS) in England.

The case was brought by a young woman and her mother, known only as ‘A and B’. The appellants who are both UK residents living in Northern Ireland, challenged the legality of the Secretary of State for Health’s failure to provide abortion services to women from Northern Ireland free on the NHS in England. In 2012, A, who was then 15, fell pregnant and with the support of her mother, B, A decided to seek the termination of her pregnancy. B accompanied A to a private clinic in Manchester where A underwent an abortion. As A was unable to access free abortion services, she had to pay £900 for a private termination. As a matter of general policy, the British Health Secretary does not fund medical services in England that would be unlawful if received in Northern Ireland.

In their argument the appellants contended, firstly, that the Secretary of State for Health’s failure to make provision for A as a UK citizen, usually resident in Northern Ireland, to undergo an abortion free of charge under the NHS was irrational and unlawful. Secondly, the appellants argued that the policy in place that only allows funding for abortions for women resident in England, excluding those in Northern Ireland, violated Article 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) taken in conjunction with Article 8, as their right to respect for private and family life was not secured without discrimination on the ground of usual residence.

Delivering the judgement of the lead majority, Lord Wilson found that the Health Secretary was entitled to afford respect to the democratic decision of the people of Northern Ireland not to fund abortion services, and to take into account the ability of Northern Irish women to lawfully travel to England and purchase private abortion services there. The Court felt that the difference in treatment was justified in striking a fair balance between the appellants’ rights and the interests of the UK community as a whole.

The appellants intend to appeal to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.

Click here for Supreme Court judgement in R (on the application of A and B) (Appellants) v Secretary of State for Health (Respondent)

Click here for summary judgement in R (on the application of A and B) (Appellants) v Secretary of State for Health (Respondent)

Share

Resources

Sustaining Partners