We've defended reproductive rights from religiously motivated restrictions since our founding.
Religion should not stand in the way of reproductive healthcare.
A desire to restrict reproductive rights, and to control women's bodies, is a hallmark of religious fundamentalism. We strongly support the right of women to have legal and safe abortions and access to emergency contraception.
Since its founding the National Secular Society has supported reproductive rights. In 1878 our founder and vice-president were prosecuted for making information about birth control accessible to working class women.
Throughout the world, reproductive rights are still under threat from theocrats. While individual religious people hold diverse views on abortion, every stage of progress in reproductive healthcare has been fought by religious organisations. Often these have involved virulent campaigns of intimidation and misinformation.
84% of people in the UK believe abortion should be legal in all or most cases. This includes 76% of religious people and 94% of nonreligious people.
In the UK, emergency contraception can still sometimes be difficult to obtain. Some religious pharmacists have defied General Pharmaceutical Council guidance by refusing to sell it or even to dispense a prescription given to a woman after a consultation with her own doctor.
People of all religions and beliefs can have disagreements on the boundaries of bodily autonomy and reproductive rights. However, religious beliefs should not be used to restrict the bodily autonomy of other people.
Take action!
1. Share your story
Tell us why you support this campaign, and how you are personally affected by the issue. You can also let us know if you would like assistance with a particular issue.
2. Join the National Secular Society
Become a member of the National Secular Society today! Together, we can separate religion and state for greater freedom and fairness.
Latest updates
Supreme Court rules NI women don’t have equal right to abortion services in England
Posted: Wed, 14 Jun 2017 12:43
In a three/two decision, the UK Supreme Court has ruled that UK citizens normally resident in Northern Ireland do not have a right to free abortion services from NHS England on the same basis as other UK citizens.
The case concerned A and B - her mother. In 2012 A, then aged 15, became pregnant and with the support of B travelled to England to obtain a termination at the Marie Stopes International Clinic in Manchester. The appellants argued that the failure of the Health Secretary to make provision for A to undergo an abortion free of charge under NHS England was unlawful as it was a breach of public law and a violation of her human rights.
NHS England has a duty to provide services to anyone in England, but does not have to provide these services free of charge to non-UK citizens. The majority court ruling argued that requiring NHS England to provide free abortion services that are not provided by NHS Northern Ireland would lead to "a substantial level of health tourism into England from within the UK and from abroad and a near collapse of the edifice of devolved health services".
The ruling makes clear that – although not required to do so – the Secretary of State can at any time make an order for NHS England to provide for free abortion services for NI residents. Jeremy Hunt has previously suggested that the abortion limit in England should be cut to 12 weeks.
Figures cited in the case – though likely to be significantly underestimated – are that around 1,000 abortions in England a year (15-16%) are for women normally resident in Northern Ireland.
In a dissenting opinion expressing disagreement with the majority opinion of the court, Lady Hale said "That law (Northern Ireland) does not prohibit women from travelling to England to have an abortion which is perfectly lawful here. It cannot constitute a good reason for a policy of denying them health services which are lawful here."
In a further dissenting opinion, Lord Kerr said: "A woman from Northern Ireland (NI) visiting England who suffers an acute attack of appendicitis will have, if it proves necessary, her appendix removed in a National Health Service hospital, without charge. The same woman, if she travels to England in order to obtain an abortion, must pay for that procedure. How can this be right? The answer is that it cannot be, and is not, right."
The majority opinion noted that "On any view the dissenting judgments of Lord Kerr and Lady Hale command considerable respect."
A spokesperson for the National Secular Society called the court's decision "alarming'. "Healthcare is a devolved issue, but human rights are not. The decision of a devolved administration within their area of authority should not be allowed to abridge the fundamental and equal human rights of UK citizens. Northern Ireland's draconian restrictions on reproductive rights are based on religious concerns, not the interests of patients and constitute a clear breach of international human rights norms.
"With plans to devolve abortion law to Scotland and growing anti-choice movements across the UK – often inspired by the intimidating tactics of US groups – this ruling sets a worrying precedent."
A separate challenge to Norther Ireland's abortion ban extending to pregnancies involving rape, incest or fatal foetal abnormalities is still ongoing.
See also Abortion ruling is a missed opportunity to recognise the disparity in women's reproductive health rights across the UK - commentary from Dr Antony Lempert of the Secular Medical Forum
Success! Pharmaceutical Council embraces secular reforms
Posted: Tue, 18 Apr 2017 15:53
The independent pharmacists' regulator has approved new standards governing the role of religion in pharmacy services, in a move welcomed by the National Secular Society.
The General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC) launched a consultation on "religion, personal values and beliefs" late last year with new guidance that placed more emphasis on the rights of patients, rather than the religious beliefs of pharmacy workers.
The NSS responded to the consultation, calling the proposals "forward-thinking and robust".
NSS campaigns director Stephen Evans said, "We are very pleased that the regulator has pushed ahead with this new guidance, which will better protect the rights of patients."
The new standards mean pharmacists will not be able to send a patient to a different provider just because an individual pharmacy worker has a religious or philosophical objection to their request for treatment or medication such as emergency contraceptives.
The Secular Medical Forum, part of the National Secular Society, raised concerns with the regulator when a prior consultation suggested that patient's needs should be 'balanced' against pharmacists' religious views.
Dr Antony Lempert, the coordinator of the Secular Medical Forum, welcomed the decision of the GPhC and said the regulator was "to be commended" for its decision and for heeding criticism of its earlier stance.
He said that information about the consultation responses supplied by the GPhC showed that the majority of pharmacists who responded "both supported the changes and identified as religious.
"It is clear that the professionalism of most pharmacists is paramount and that it is only a small cohort of very religious pharmacists who wish to impose their own views on patients and obstruct reasonable, legal care in the pharmacy setting."
"The onus is now on pharmacists to ensure that they don't put themselves in a position to obstruct patient care," Dr Lempert said.
Under the new guidance it is "explicit" that the "responsibility is on the pharmacist to ensure that no-one's care is compromised because of their views."
