Association of Lawyers for the Defence of the Unborn
A Minor
Newsletter 31
Autumn 1986
Contents: Obituary - Lord Russell of Killowen; London Conference; Activities Overseas; Minors and Abortion
The Association of Lawyers for the Defence of the Unborn
40 BEDFORD STREET, LONDON, WC2E 9EN
Patrons of the Association: The Rt. Hon. Lord WHEATLEY; the Rt. Hon. Lord RAWLINSON OF EWELL, P.C., Q.C.
Chairman and Editor D. A. POOLE, Q.C., M.A. (Oxon)
Hon. Secretary M. N. M. BELL, M.A. (Cantab.)
Hon. Treasurer T. G. A. BOWLES, M.A. (Cantab.)
Autumn 1986
Number 31
News and Comment
Obituary
It is with great regret that we learnt of the death of our distinguished patron Lord Russell of Killowen, and we extend our deepest sympathy to his family. We salute his memory as on of the most eminent lawyers of his time, and as one who was not afraid to be associated openly with the cause of justice for the unborn child. All the more honour to Lord Russell. May he rest in peace.
London Conference
The Association is holding a London Conference this year on Thursday the 16th October 1986 at 6.00 p.m. in the Parliament Chamber of the Middle Temple, London EC4, just south of Fleet Street. The principal speakers will be the Earl of Halsbury, F.R.S., and Dr A. P. Cole F.R.C.P.E., D.C.H. Refreshments will be available following the Conference.
Members wishing to attend the Conference are asked to contact the Treasurer at 40 Bedford Street, with a cheque for £5 in favour of A.L.D.U., on receipt of which a ticket will be sent to them. It is obviously helpful to the Association if as many members as possible will obtain tickets in advance, but those unable to do so can pay at the door.
The subject of the conference will be the question why lawyers should be concerned about the human embryo. This is an excellent opportunity to introduce your friends to the Association. We hope that all members in the area will make an effort to attend, and to bring as many of their friends as possible.
Activities Overseas
In addition to our activities in this country the Association keeps in touch with pro-life organisations and particularly with organisations of pro-life lawyers, throughout the world. We have been heartened during the past 18 months by the activities of various organisations of pro-life lawyers on the continent, particularly in Germany, Holland and Belgium. Vigorous organisations of pro-life lawyers also exist in Canada and the U.S.A., and the former in particular makes a point of keeping us informed about its activities, for which we are grateful. We also keep in touch with all our members in many countries throughout thew world who have not yet succeeded in setting up organisations of pro-life lawyers in their own countries. The Association has members in 33 countries and the Secretary often wishes that he had more linguistic ability, as we receive documents in various languages from our various overseas members.
Minors and Abortion
The case of Gillick v West Norfolk & Wisbech A.H.A. and D.H.S.S., [1985] 3 All E.R. 402, is still producing many repercussions. One of these is that the general public now appears to be more aware of the fact that it is an offence for a man to have sexual intercourse with a girl under the age of 16. Members of this Association have been consulted by pro-life pregnancy counsellors who have been asked for advice by a girl under 16 whose parents have told her that if she does not have an abortion they will report the man concerned to the police and he will be prosecuted. Undoubtedly such a threat is a very strong inducement to a minor to have an abortion, if she thinks that the alternative is that her boyfriend will go to prison. What advice should a pro-life counsellor give to such a girl? How real is the threat? In order to answer one needs to be aware not only of the legal position, but also of current police practice.
The Sexual Offences Act 1956, s.6(1), provides that it is an offence, subject to the exceptions mentioned in that section, for a man to have unlawful sexual intercourse with a girl under the age of 16. The principal exception is where the man is under the age of 24, and has not previously charged with a like offence, and believes the girl to be aged over 16, and has reasonable cause for such belief.
The first step, therefore, would be for the counsellor to consider the question of whether this exception could apply. If the relationship between the girl and the man involved was of long-standing it is unlikely that he would be unaware of her age, but if it was a "one-off event" and the girl was physically mature in appearance or very close to the age of 16; then this exception might provide a defence.
If the girl in question was under the age of 13 then this is a serious offence under sefction 5 of the Sexual Offences Act 1056, and undoubtedly a prosecution would result if the matter was reported to the police, and there were reasonable grounds for believing that the offence had taken place and the boyfriend was responsible.
If, however, the girl is aged between 13 and 16 whether the police would prosecute or not would depend on the particular facts of the case. There appear to be no hard and fast rules, but in appropriate cases it is the police practice to caution the offender rather than bring a prosecution. Under what circumstances, therefore, would the police be likely to prosecute? It is understood that the following are some of the factors which they would take into account:
- If the offence was denied by the boy concerned. The police would normally consider a caution to be appropriate only if there was an admission of the offence.
- If the police were not satisfied that there was consent on the part of the girl. In that case the offence would be rape, and a caution would not be appropriate.
- They would not consider a caution appropriate if they concluded that there was some element of corruption of a minor, either in the act itself or the events leading up to it.
- They would be more likely to prosecute if they considered that there was an element of coercion in the relationship. There would be a presumption of this if the man was considerably older, or in some way responsible for the girl.
- They would certainly take into account the attitude of the parents of both the boy and the girl in deciding whether a caution or a prosecution was more appropriate. If the parents of the girl were using the threat of prosecution as a form of blackmail to persuade the girl to have an abortion, this might well affect their view of the matter.
- They would look at the relationship between the boy and the girl. If this was of long standing, then subject to what has been said above they would be more likely to caution the boy rather than prosecute him.
It must be emphasised, however, that the police will judge every case on its merits, and there are no hard and fast rules.
The other possibility is a private prosecution by the girl's parents. This is unlikely in view of the expense and the other problems which they would be likely to encounter. Very few solicitors would recommend them to proceed with a private prosecution.
One of the reasons why parents seek to press their children to have abortions is that the parents do not want the embarrassment and publicity associated with their schoolgirl daughter having a baby. If the girl is resolutley determined to continue with the pregancy, then to report the matter to the police or to bring a private prosecution would attract to the case the very publicity which the parents were seeking to avoid. This is certainly a point which a counsellor could make to the parents of the girl.
Assuming that the girl was undecided what to do, the counsellor could also point out to the girl that even if she did have an abortion this would not necessarily protect her boyfriend. The parents could still report him, or the matter could come to the attention of the police in another way, and he could still be prosecuted for the commission of the offence. The fact that the girl had had an abortion would not help him at all. The possibility of parental blackmail would not thereby be averted by the abortion. They could still make the same threat to report the boyfriend, for example in order to put further pressure on the girl not to have anything to do with him in future.
Taking all the above factors into account, a pregnancy counsellor might well be able to convey a considerable degree of reassurance to a minor. There are, of course, many other grounds, physical and psychological and legal, why a girl under 16 should not have an abortion, which a counsellor could mention to her or her parents.
