1 in 5 Abortion Clinics Breaking the Law.

Up to one in five abortion clinics is suspected of breaking the law and faces a police inquiry following an official investigation ordered by the Health Secretary, The Daily Telegraph can disclose.

The regulator conducted a series of unannounced raids on every clinic offering abortions this week and found that a “shocking” number may be breaking the law.

The Daily Telegraph understands that more than 250 private and NHS clinics were visited and more than 50 were “not in compliance” with the law or regulations. Doctors were regularly falsifying consent forms and patients were not receiving acceptable levels of advice and counselling in many clinics, the Care Quality Commission (CQC) discovered.

Andrew Lansley, the Health Secretary, said he was “shocked” by the findings of the CQC’s audit and was preparing to report doctors and organisations to the police. Many clinics may be stripped of the licences that allow them to offer abortions.

Mr Lansley is understood to be preparing an urgent statement to Parliament on the scandal today.

He ordered the investigation into the clinics after this newspaper disclosed that several were offering illegal sex-selection terminations and falsifying paperwork.

He said yesterday that the regulator had found that a number of clinics may be acting beyond the “spirit and letter of the law”.

“I was appalled,” he said. “Because if it happens, it is pretty much people engaging in a culture of both ignoring the law and trying to give themselves the right to say that although Parliament may have said this, we believe in abortion on demand.”

He said it was not just a matter of enforcing the law. “There is the risk that women don’t get the appropriate level of pre-abortion support and counselling because, if your attitude is that, 'You’ve arrived for an abortion and you should have one,’ well actually many women don’t get the degree of support they should,” said Mr Lansley.

The main problem identified by the CQC was that doctors were “pre-signing” consent forms.

The law requires the signatures of both the supervising consultant and a second professional who has either seen the patient or read the medical notes and the summary of a consultation.

During this week’s inspections, regulators are understood to have found piles of “pre-signed forms”.

The Health Secretary said: “I was rather shocked by the pre-signing of certificates. We’re talking about doctors who have professional responsibilities and it seems to me that you can’t satisfy your professional and ethical responsibilities [by pre-signing].

“I completely understand the law doesn’t require the doctor to have met the woman concerned, but to pre-sign certificates when you don’t even know which woman it relates to and there hasn’t been an assessment, is completely contrary to the spirit and letter of the law.”

He added that action would be taken within days. “We’re dealing with all this quickly,” Mr Lansley said. “If there is evidence of an offence we will give it directly to the police.”

The Health Secretary said pre-signing forms “constitutes a criminal offence” and could also lead to doctors being struck off by the General Medical Council.

Mr Lansley warned that so-called abortion on demand was not acceptable. “It’s not what Parliament intended and it’s not what the law provides for,” he said. “My job is to enforce the law.”

Last month, The Daily Telegraph disclosed how abortion clinics throughout Britain were illegally offering abortions on the basis of the sex of a foetus.

Over three weeks, four pregnant women, accompanied by undercover raids by the Care Quality Commission this week are seen as the first sign of the regulator’s new “tough” approach after sustained criticism.

The rigour of the commission, responsible for regulating abortion clinics, hospitals and care homes, has been repeatedly called into question since it was established in 2009.

Last month, the commission’s chief executive resigned after a Department of Health report criticised the quango.

Cynthia Bower stepped down from her £195,000-a-year post on the first day of The Daily Telegraph investigation into abortion clinics, which found that some doctors were offering terminations on the basis of gender and raised major concerns over the regulator.

The commission was established with the merger of three health care regulators.

The department’s report noted that the first three years “have been difficult” and staff morale was “relatively low”.

The commission has faced criticism virtually from the start. Seven months into its existence, Baroness Young, its chairman, resigned after Basildon Hospital in Essex was exposed for having filthy wards and a high death rate despite being rated as “good” by the regulator a month previously.

The watchdog also admitted that it had made an “unforgivable error of judgment” after failing to act on a whistle-blower’s “grave” concerns about the behaviour of staff at Winterbourne View, which was later exposed in secretly recorded footage shown on the BBC programme Panorama. In its report, the Department of Health said the commission faced “strategic difficulties” with delays having “seriously challenged public confidence in its role”.

The review had been scheduled for later this Parliament, but was brought forward following ministerial concerns.

A Whitehall source said ministers were assured that the commission’s house was in order, “but every time they opened a door, skeletons fell out”.

The level of potential abuse uncovered at abortion clinics this week is expected to lead to further searching questions over regulation in the past.

21st century Great Britain should follow Northern Ireland's lead (and the ROI) and get rid of pro-death laws. That would make us much more civilised.

What do you make of it in light of sex selective abortion (both here and abroad)?

Oh do crawl back to the dark ages.

<3 x

Telegraph link with pictures and video

Thoughts and opinions? Is abortion too easy to access? Or is this quite alright? What do you make of it in light of sex selective abortion (both here and abroad)? What do you make of it in light of the article calling for infanticide to be legalised.

As for the infanticide thing, I did agree with it. Most were to stupid to realise the theoretical context behind it. There are many cases where humanely euthanizing a very suffering newborn would be more humane then letting the poor thing live. We do it to puppies and kitties.

They were not just talking about the extreme conditions such as being born with no kidneys and half a brain, or having a triploidy in a chromosome with a life expectancy of mere days outside the womb, where abortion is allowed until birth under the 1967 Act. They mentioned unwanted children too, saying that the parents may suffer psychological distress from adoption which would be greater than "after-birth abortion" (if this term is ever used officially it will cut the connection between abortion and "a woman's body" forever, making it a term for any KILLING.)

They also talked about killing babies who were HEALTHY. Their argument was not for parent-chosen euthanasia where life could be unbearable but that no-one has a moral right to life until they are sentient beings, and that newborns' lack of sentience made it okay to kill them for ANY reason at all; they belioeve they have zero rights.

That is what made reasonable people go mad. If it was for cases of painful incurable abnormalities, they would not have got so much publicity; juries have let parents off not guilty when they have been charged for killing in this circumstance in several countries, so many people must be sympathetic to it.

It's no different from aborting foetuses with Down Syndrome now is it? Not that I agree with either.

. See the emotional word difference between 'baby' and 'fetus'. Or even newborn and fetus.

21st century Great Britain should follow Northern Ireland's lead (and the ROI) and get rid of pro-death laws. That would make us much more civilised.

21st century Great Britain should follow Northern Ireland's lead (and the ROI) and get rid of pro-death laws. That would make us much more civilised.

If you're going to make emotionally based rather than logically-based arguments, the least you should do is use rhetorically powerful and eloquent language. "Pro-death" just doesn't quite cut it.

They are clearly against abortion. Its a difficult concept, I think the laws should be tightened extremely and put into practice strictly. There are plenty of childless people who'd love to adopt and don't get to because the system is so skewed. Therefore an unwanted healthy baby shouldnt be allowed to be aborted after say 12-16 weeks and should be adopted out.

wtf is a "pro-death law"?

I don't like the Dark Ages. I do like morality and human life.

21st century Great Britain should follow Northern Ireland's lead (and the ROI) and get rid of pro-death laws. That would make us much more civilised.