Cleft-palate abortions in the UK

When I was living and working in London, in the Fall of 2003, I remember finding it refreshing that, over there, abortion-related questions are still, for the most part, political questions.  Specifically, there was a debate going on about the unsettlingly common practice of aborting unborn children with cleft-palates.  Leading the charge on this and some other pro-life issues was a young curate named Joanna Jepson.  She was born with a cleft-palate, which was repaired, and her brother has Down's Syndrome.

Here is a powerful op-ed of hers, from the Telegraph:

As a Church of England curate, born myself with a congenital jaw defect 28 years ago, my own upbringing has instilled in me a sense of what is right and what is wrong. For me, an abortion on any foetus - let alone one that is seven months old - for what is a treatable facial condition, can never be morally justified.  [RG:  Note that even this "Church of England curate" says "for me".]  Yet, as a society, we are now saying that a cleft lip and palate are grounds to end a viable unborn child's life.

Under the Abortion Act, as it was amended in 1990, it is legal for doctors to terminate the life of a foetus up to the point of birth if there is a "substantial risk" of the child being "seriously handicapped". But in reality, for an abortion to be lawful, none of the conditions identified by the Act need actually exist. They simply need to be thought to exist by two doctors acting "in good faith". Taken to its extreme, the law as it stands today, is therefore saying that a remedial condition such as mine is a good enough reason for me not to be alive. . . .

How can we put such little value on life? The history of the 20th century and the chilling horror of the Nazi eugenics programme - supervised by doctors "in good faith"- show only too clearly what can happen when supposed imperfections are deemed to negate the right to life. As a society, we now seem to be saying that the only measure of a life's worth is whether it is wanted or not. . . .

Of the three main party leaders, only Michael Howard has claimed he would like to see the abortion law changed, lowering the upper limit to 20 weeks. Tony Blair has abdicated responsibility, weakly insisting that he "dislikes the idea of abortion". Perhaps he should ask himself why he dislikes the idea so much. . . .

Rick