As evidence emerges suggesting approximately 400 sex-selective abortions of baby girls happened between 2017 and 2021, Britain’s largest abortion provider continues to claim the practice is not illegal, despite a Government confirmation to the contrary.
The British Pregnancy Advisory Service (BPAS), which in the last financial year performed over 110,000 abortions in the UK, claims on its website that sex-selective abortions are not illegal, sparking wide condemnation.
On its website, BPAS claims “The law is silent on the [sex-selective abortion] matter. Reason of fetal sex is not a specified ground for abortion within the Abortion Act, but nor is it specifically prohibited”.
Click Like if you are pro-life to like the LifeNews Facebook page!
This directly contradicts a statement from the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) in response to these revelations. “This Government’s position is unequivocal: sex-selective abortion is illegal in England and Wales and will not be tolerated”.
“Sex is not a lawful ground for termination of pregnancy, and it is a criminal offence for any practitioner to carry out an abortion for that reason alone”.
“Anyone with evidence that this illegal practice is occurring must report it to the police immediately”.
The DHSC’s position on sex-selective abortion has been explicit since 2014, when they issued guidance saying “Abortion on the grounds of gender alone is illegal. Gender is not itself a lawful ground under the Abortion Act”.
Despite the Government’s position, a BPAS spokesperson doubled down on their view that sex-selective abortion is not illegal, insisting “there are instances” where abortion on the grounds of the sex of the unborn baby may be justified.
Approximately 400 sex-selective abortions of unborn baby girls
BPAS’s statement on sex-selective abortion follows revelations from a Department of Health and Social Care 2023 report of sex ratios at birth, which suggested that approximately 400 sex-selective abortions have taken place of female foetuses of Indian ethnicity between 2017 and 2021.
The report explains that where the ratio of males to females for a particular ethnicity or mother’s country of birth is greater than 107 males born for every 100 females born, “this may indicate that people in this group have been involved in sex selective abortions”.
The 2023 report conducted an analysis of birth sex ratios by the ethnicity of the child for England and Wales, both for overall birth sex ratio and by birth order, and found the “birth sex ratio for children of Indian ethnicity of the birth order 3 or more was 113 and found to be significantly higher than 107”.
This disparity in sex ratio at birth was used to draw the conclusion that “there may have been approximately 400 sex selective abortions to female fetuses of Indian ethnicity, after 2 or more previous children, in England and Wales over the 5 year period from 2017 to 2021”.
The report may underestimate the total number of sex-selective abortions in the UK
Due to the small number of births within many ethnic minority communities analysed, even a large imbalance in sex ratios at birth for a particular minority community may not be identified as statistically significant using the approach taken by this report, meaning sex-selective abortions could be happening in a number of these minority communities in the UK, but are not being detected by the statistical approach taken to produce the report. This suggests the 2023 report, which found evidence of approximately 400 sex-selective abortions, may be underestimating the true number of sex-selective abortions in the UK.
The report itself illustrates this limitation, stating that for 100 births, there would need to be a sex ratio of about 149 boys per 100 girls before it is flagged as significant; even with 5,000 births, you still need 112 boys per 100 girls. Furthermore, the report also outlines that, because of this limitation, 80 countries with fewer than 100 births were excluded entirely. The absence of a statistically significant finding elsewhere is not the same as proof that sex selection is not happening within other ethnic minority communities in the UK.
Countries with a sex-selective abortion problem which have migrant populations in the UK, where sex-selective abortions may be happening but where the approach taken by this report is likely to not be able to detect them, include Pakistan, Bangladesh, China, Hong Kong, Albania, Nepal, Vietnam, South Korea, Armenia, Georgia, Taiwan, Tunisia, Azerbaijan and Montenegro.
On the NHS, it is not possible for mothers to find out the sex of their baby until 18 weeks. However, the report outlines that it is now possible to identify fetal sex through NIPT testing in private clinics after just 7 weeks gestation.
Repeated denial of the problem by abortion campaigners
Pro-abortion campaigners have repeatedly stated there is no evidence that sex-selective abortions are happening in the UK, even after the Department of Health’s findings released in 2023, indicating there were around 400 such cases in the UK.
In June 2025, Stella Creasy MP said in Parliament that sex-selective abortion was a “trope” and added that “nobody can prove that abortion for sex selection reasons has happened”.
In May of the same year, she told Glamour Magazine that “Parliament ordered a national investigation into claims that ‘sex selection’ was happening, only for it to show there was no evidence of this at all”.
In July 2024, BPAS, with 24 other organisations, including the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, said in a Parliamentary briefing that “The UK Government has found no evidence that women from some cultural backgrounds are ending pregnancies if they are expecting a girl”.
A March 2025 report from the British Medical Association said that “ongoing analysis of gender ratios in Britain have repeatedly found ‘no evidence for gender selective abortions occurring in Great Britain’”.
Data on sex ratio at birth may be being delayed
The previous Government produced sex-ratio at birth reports every year from 2016 to 2023, with the most recent report being published under the Conservative Government in October 2023 (this being the report that showed the 400 missing girls). These reports have routinely been released in October/November.
However, since the current Labour Government came into power in July 2024, it has not published the reports that were expected to be published in Oct/Nov 2024 and Oct/Nov 2025. The Labour Government have made no commitment to when they will release the data.
The previous Conservative Government apparently had no difficulties publishing these reports on time, and the data they report on is already delayed by 2 years with each report.
The Government is required to produce these reports every year following an amendment to the Serious Crime Act 2015 (which became section 84 of the Serious Crime Act 2015), which required the Government to investigate the issue; one of the outcomes of that investigation is that they committed to produce the sex-ratio reports each year.
Further evidence of sex-selective abortion
There is a growing body of evidence that sex-selective abortions are already occurring in the UK.
A 2018 BBC investigation revealed evidence that new non-invasive prenatal tests (NIPT) were being used on a widespread basis to determine the sex of babies early in pregnancy and that some women are coming under intense pressure to undergo sex-selective abortions.
Evidence was strong enough for the Labour Party to call for a ban on using NIPT for determining the baby’s sex in 2018, as a preference for boys in some cultures and the concept of ‘family balancing’ may have led to an increase in the numbers of abortions of baby girls.
Also in 2018, Sky News reported fears that “The [NIPT] test can lead to the termination of baby girls due to a preference for boys in some cultures”, and, as Labour MP Naz Shah stated, could force expectant mothers and fathers to adopt methods such as NIPT “to live up to expectations of family members”. She further told the BBC’s Victoria Derbyshire programme that “NIPT screenings should be used for their intended purpose, to screen for serious conditions such as Down’s syndrome […] The government needs to look into this exploitative practice and enforce appropriate restrictions”.
A 2017 report by the Nuffield Council on Bioethics (a government advisory body) concluded that there was a “real possibility that permitting NIPT for sex determination in the UK may be encouraging sex selection”. In its view, the risk was high enough to justify calling for a restriction on NIPT.
The report also found several websites offering baby gender tests for about £170, and The Nuffield Council on Bioethics warned that the increasingly widespread private NIPT testing in the UK could lead to the country becoming a haven for “sex-selective” abortions.
A 2015 Department of Health report on sex-selective abortion detailed the personal testimonies of women who had been coerced into obtaining a sex-selective abortion in the UK by their partner or family.
In its evidence submitted to the Government, Jeena International (a charity supporting women from ethnic minority communities in the UK) notes how one woman, “A”, “undertook the decision to have an abortion based on gender, not because of domestic violence or duress by any of her in-laws or husband, but for various complex cultural reasons both self imposed and community imposed, she thought by giving birth to a boy she would be accepted into the family, she would therefore have a status… A registered at an ante-natal clinic and attended all appointments, when she was 18/19 weeks and went for a private scan at Harley St, as a result of the scan that she was expecting a girl. The next day A booked an appointment to have an abortion, she told a doctor it was because she could not afford to have a baby. Ante-natal clinic called to chase her missed appointment, A informed them that she had miscarried when she was on holiday. A at the age of 29 was again expecting however this time twins she then repeated the cycle of aborting on the basis of gender”.
Abortion provider, BPAS, defends sex-selective abortion
This is not the first time that the abortion provider, BPAS, has publicly defended sex-selective abortion. A Telegraph investigation into sex-selective abortion in 2012 found that doctors agreed to perform such abortions “no questions asked”, with one such doctor informing an undercover journalist, “I don’t ask questions. If you want a termination, you want a termination”.
While the Department of Health reiterated at the time that “abortion on the grounds of gender alone is illegal”, Ann Furedi, then-CEO of BPAS, put out an open letter defending the doctors and claiming that “sex selective abortion is not gender discrimination” because “gender discrimination applies only to living people”. They argued that unborn children “cannot be said to suffer from discrimination”. BPAS also published the Britain’s Abortion Law booklet and online material explicitly telling women that sex-selective abortion is not illegal.
Then-Health Secretary Andrew Lansley said, “I’m extremely concerned to hear about these allegations. Sex selection is illegal and is morally wrong. I’ve asked my officials to investigate this as a matter of urgency”.
In the wake of the Telegraph investigation, in 2013 then-CEO of BPAS Ann Furedi said that women are legally free to terminate because of the baby’s gender and that there was nothing wrong with providing sex-selective abortions.
The abortion provider has consistently defended the practice of sex-selective abortion. In 2014, they voiced opposition to a move supported by the vast majority of MPs (181 to 1) to create an explicit ban of sex-selective abortion. The organisation opposed a similar amendment to ban sex-selective abortion in 2015 too.
In 2017, in a submission to the All Party Parliamentary Group on Population, Development and Reproductive Health, BPAS outlined their opposition to restricting sex-selective abortion. In the same year, BPAS Medical Director, Patricia Lohr, when giving evidence to an Irish parliamentary committee on abortion law reform, was pressed repeatedly about whether she agreed with Furedi’s stance on sex-selective abortion. She responded “I absolutely agree with the view that it is for the woman to decide when and whether she is ready to parent”.
In 2017, Loose Women host Denise Van Outen became visibly emotional as Ann Furedi, then CEO of BPAS, said that there is nothing wrong with sex-selective abortions.
In 2024, BPAS said they “strongly oppose efforts” to ban sex-selective abortion.
Towards the end of last year, in November, BPAS Head of Policy, Rachael Clarke, responded to a journalist who was appalled at the prospect of sex-selective abortions becoming legal in Scotland, apparently justifying the practice if a woman is in an abusive relationship.
Kevin Duffy, former Global Director of Clinics Development at abortion provider Marie Stopes International, responded to Clarke’s comments saying “Clarke is wrong, what she proposes is not healthcare, or care of any sort. She wants to provide the abortion and then send the vulnerable woman back into the awful abusive, environment in which she has been living in fear and dread”.
In 2017, a former BPAS trustee, Wendy Savage, said that women should be able to have abortions because their unborn child is the “wrong” sex.
Of the 13 members of the Scottish Government Expert Group who recommended Scotland legalise sex-selective abortion, two are past Trustees of BPAS (Annabelle Glassier, Sally Sheldon), and one is Head of Advocacy (Rachael Clarke) at the UK’s largest abortion provider, BPAS.
Sex-selective abortion a “repugnant practice”
Dame Jasvinder Sanghera, a campaigner against forced marriages, said “Without a shadow of a doubt, sex-selective abortions are going on. There are many reasons. There is still the practice of dowry, which means girls immediately become a financial burden”.
“Health professionals need to stop turning a blind eye because of cultural sensitivities or the fear of being accused of racism”.
Journalist Suzanne Moore said in the Telegraph that this case perpetuates the worrying fact that some cultures “think girls are so worthless that they should not even be born”.
Journalist Dominic Lawson called the practice “barbaric”, saying, “We have for some time known that the termination of pregnancies solely because the child-to-be is identified by scans as female has been a feature within parts of the British-Indian community. Now we have the official statistics to prove it”.
Rani Bilkhu, founder of Jeena International, a charity for Asian victims of domestic violence, said, “The authorities are reluctant to talk about this issue because they feel it might be based on racism, but it isn’t. This is lived experience from our communities, and we need to talk about it”.
“There is a lot of burden on the woman to give birth to a male, even more so if she has given birth to one or two girls. Pressure is imposed by the in-laws and the husband”.
“And it’s regardless of whether they are first-generation or second-generation immigrants, or educated or not”, she added.
Former Member of the European Parliament, Annunziata Rees-Mogg, said, “Gender selection is abhorrent. As is aborting perfectly healthy and viable babies up to date of birth. The government’s position on the latter makes the former more likely thanks to gender scans”.
Speaking to GB News, journalist Khadija Khan criticised the revelations, saying, “It’s time health professionals need to stop turning a blind eye because of cultural sensitivities”, and saying that sex-selective abortion is “a repugnant practice that should make any mother recoil”.
Khan went on to accuse BPAS of “gaslighting vulnerable women who seek its services” via their claim that “law is silent on the matter” of sex-selective abortions.
She said that for the women who do have abortions on the basis of sex, they are not doing so so freely but under “the expectation and judgment of their families and the wider community, and they may even live in fear of their husbands divorcing them – or worse”. Khan said it “beggars belief” BPAS “would want to facilitate such a corrosive custom as this”.
Peer launches bid to stop sex-selective abortion being legalised in England and Wales
Senior Conservative Peer, Baroness Eaton, who has tabled an amendment to the Crime and Policing Bill to ensure sex-selective abortion does not become legal, said “This is a great tragedy to which society must not turn a blind eye. Parliament needs to change the law to ensure there is an explicit prohibition on sex-selective abortions, protecting both baby girls and women at risk of being coerced into abortions”.
Tonia Antoniazzi MP launched an amendment to the Crime and Policing Bill that would legalise sex-selective abortion for women performing their own abortions at home, throughout all nine months of pregnancy. The Bill was passed after just 46 minutes of debate in the Commons in June last year.
Spokesperson for Right To Life UK, Catherine Robinson, said “It’s irresponsible for BPAS to publish advice suggesting that sex-selective abortion is not illegal, because it risks normalising sex-selective abortion and is likely encouraging abortions sought purely because of a baby’s sex”.
“It is also likely making it much harder for women to push back when a husband, boyfriend, or other family member is pressuring them into an abortion simply because they are expecting a girl. Women trying to resist that pressure by pointing out that sex-selective abortion is unlawful may be met with the response from coercive third parties that the UK’s largest abortion provider itself says that it is not illegal”.
“Even though the Government has said that sex-selective abortion is illegal, the UK’s largest abortion provider, BPAS, which receives the vast majority of its funding from the Government, is telling women that sex-selective abortion is not illegal. This is a shocking contradiction in values from the Government”.
“The Government must act without delay to cut all funding it provides to BPAS, urgently update legislation to introduce an explicit ban on sex-selective abortion, and must not pursue further changes to legislation, such as those proposed in Scotland, that would likely make this problem much worse”.
