THOUSANDS of women could be banned from aborting severely disabled babies as a result of a legal challenge by anti-abortion groups using a little-noticed clause in the proposed European constitution.

The groups plan to use a passage that prohibits countries from “eugenic practices” to get a legal ban on the screening of babies for genetic deformities or diseases.

Each year in Britain about 1,800 babies are aborted after genetic tests show them to have any of 200 conditions, including Down’s syndrome, spina bifida and muscular dystrophy.

Pro-abortion groups said that they would fight a ban on such genetic screening, declaring it “deeply inhumane”.

The Government is committed to signing the European constitution, which would take primacy over United Kingdom law, and insists that there is no need for a referendum. The draft includes a new charter of fundamental rights, which has been declared non-negotiable. It requires the “prohibition of eugenic practices, particularly those aiming at the selection of persons”.

Professor Jack Scarisbrick, national director of the charity Life, said: “If we join the constitution, we will definitely invoke it to procure an end to eugenic abortions. Of course it is eugenics — it’s weeding out substandard members of the human race to stop them being a drag on society.”

The pro-Life Alliance campaign group is seeking a formal legal opinion on getting a ban on ante-natal genetic screening. Josephine Quintavalle, its spokeswoman, said: “Eugenics is the underlying philosophy of pre-natal testing in the UK. We will fight tooth and nail to get it stopped.”

However, pro-choice groups have said that they will campaign against a ban. Ann Furedi, chief executive of the British Pregnancy Advisory Service, said: “I would be extremely opposed to such a ban. It should be the decision of families, who actually have to live with the situation. It is completely inappropriate to categorise it as eugenics. Women are motivated by saying they can’t cope with the situation, not that it is wrong for such people to be born.”

Alastair Kent, director of the Genetic Interest Group, representing families with genetic diseases, said: “If it is interpreted that ante-natal testing were a eugenic practice, it would penalise the small number of families that have children with severe abnormalities. It would be deeply inhumane.”

There is no legal definition of “eugenics”, but medical practice accepts that some elements of genetic screening — either to decide whether to implant an embryo or to abort a foetus — are eugenic.

Professor Tom Baldwin, a member of the Nuffield Council on Bioethics and of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, said: “It’s seriously worrying. A court would have a hard time showing it is not eugenics — it is designed to prevent the birth of a person with certain genetic characteristics.”

The charter on fundamental rights, which was written four years ago, goes considerably further than the European Convention on Human Rights that the Labour Government has already enshrined into United Kingdom law. The charter was originally intended to be a political declaration of no legal consequence, but earlier this year was included in the proposed constitution, giving it supremacy over UK law. It will be up to the European Court of Justice in Strasbourg to decide whether UK law conforms with the charter.

To blunt the impact of the charter, the Government insisted on a clause stating that it would apply only when EU law was being implemented in the UK. A government spokesman said: “The charter is limited to EU law, which doesn’t cover abortion. This part of the charter relates only to forced sterilisations, forced pregnancies and other international crimes.”

Andrew Duff, a Liberal Democrat MEP involved in drafting the charter, and who campaigned for it to be included in the constitution, said: “The decision to abort is up to the mother — it’s not the purpose of the charter that we should interfere. The European Court of Justice would throw it out.”

DEBATE: Is foetal abnormality screening a eugenic practice? Send your emails to
debate@thetimes.co.uk

Explore World News

• World Agenda

• Iraq News

• US & Americas News

• Europe News

• Middle East News

• Asia News

• Africa News

• Ireland News

Times Recommends

• The Japanese Prime Minister is doomed: or is he?
• Brighton company 'involved in cyber attack'
• The art of survival: it’s all in the mind