CHANGES to Jersey’s outdated law on abortion will be debated by the States in January 2026, after an amendment to the Government Plan was accepted by ministers – but this revised date is still over a year later than originally promised.
The move follows the results of an independent review suggesting that the Island’s current system was “dehumanising” and “distressing” for patients.
The report was commissioned by government, and produced by the Centre for Reproductive Research and Communication at a cost of £10,790.
It was published in February, and focuses on Jersey’s 1997 abortion law – which has remained largely unchanged for over 25 years.
Despite the report’s findings – and previous promises that legislative changes would be voted on by States Members before the end of 2024 – it emerged earlier this year that the law would not be updated until the end of 2026 because of “resourcing challenges”.
This provoked the amendment to the Budget by the Health and Social Services Scrutiny Panel, which has now been accepted by ministers.
In the amendment, the panel pointed to evidence from the CRRC’s “Lived experiences of termination of pregnancy in Jersey” report.
The study found that the Jersey’s current legal framework for termination caused “significant distress” to participants – with some needing to travel off-island for care.
In addition, the study found that patients were often unaware of the specific legal requirements, and found the abortion process “confusing and stressful”.
The report noted that “participants were concerned about confidentiality”, and encountered “inconsistent sensitivity” from healthcare professionals.
Researchers also found that “accurate and transparent information” about abortion and the associated costs was “challenging” for participants to access on the Government of Jersey website.
The costs associated with having an abortion were “a concern for most participants, and presented barriers to those who were experiencing financial difficulties”, the report said.
However, researchers acknowledged that “many participants expressed gratitude for the healthcare they received within the service”.
The expert team highlighted eight “pinch points” during the abortion process in Jersey, including a lack of awareness about the Island’s 12-week gestational age limit for termination.
One of the interviewees, Participant A, described it as “one of the very difficult things about living in Jersey”.
She said: “Sometimes women don’t find out until too late to have a termination in Jersey, and that in itself is quite traumatic.”
The researchers found that other aspects of the abortion law “were not as well known by participants and came as a surprise during the process of seeking care”.
Participant E described how she was “unaware” that termination was not available on request, and that she could be refused care.
“I didn’t realise that … the GP could sort of say no. I had no idea about any of it,” she said.
Researchers also found that “all participants … were concerned about confidentiality”.
Concerns were raised by participants about Jersey being a “small place” where “everyone knows everyone”, and “if anyone gets a whiff of your business, everybody knows”.
Researchers found that “this was compounded by the fact that termination services are delivered in an outpatient unit in the main hospital on the same day each week”.
Participant E explained: “Because it’s an outpatient facility, there were quite a few people in there, but I was very aware that Tuesdays are ‘the day’.”
Participant C described sitting in the waiting room next to a friend of the man with whom she became pregnant.
She said: “Jersey is a very small island. We’ve got a really small community. So, yes, when I went into the waiting room, I’d already recognised two or three women … I was waiting in the waiting room, and again … with the whole [process] not being discreet, they literally shout your full name out.
“At the time, with Jersey being so small, I was sat next to the … well, the guy that I was seeing, obviously it was his baby. But I was sat next to his best friend.”
The report said that participants offered several suggestions that they felt would improve their experience and protect their confidentiality, including moving abortion care to GP surgeries – which were felt to be more private – and providing care remotely through telemedicine.
The report also found that all participants “described cost as a significant source of distress and confusion during their termination care”.
Two participants had not realised that they were liable for the cost of the termination until they had started the process of accessing care.
Researchers stated that the “cost of £185 for a resident and £511 for a non-resident represents an inconsistency in the way that healthcare is funded in Jersey”.
One interviewee described how the process for seeking funding support for a termination in Jersey was confusing and “dehumanising”, and felt inappropriate.
The exception to self-funding an abortion is for terminations on the grounds of foetal abnormality, or where necessary to save the person’s life or prevent grave permanent injury to their physical or mental health.
These terminations are fully funded if they are carried out in Jersey, and if patients are required to travel to the UK for care, their costs are covered and transport arranged for them.
However, Islanders who have a pregnancy beyond 12 weeks’ gestation and are seeking a termination on grounds of distress are also required to travel to the UK for care – but do not receive any financial or logistical support to do so.
Participant A reflected on how the cost of travelling overseas for care had the potential to impact some women on lower incomes.
She said: “Because for many people, the reason why they might choose to terminate would be financial, and the fact that you then may need to travel to the UK, pay for hotel accommodation, pay for the flights – all of that is additional cost.
“When you think: ‘okay, it’s cheaper than the cost of a child over its lifetime’. But some women don’t have that money up-front to be able to access that service.”
One participant told researchers about the emotional impact of travelling to the UK for a procedure to induce foetal demise, before returning to Jersey for an induction and delivery.
Participant A said: “I guess the way I can describe it is feeling like a human coffin. Because you are carrying around your dead baby, knowing they are dead, knowing that you’re going to have to deliver them, and you have no control over when that will be.”
Participant A also described the physical impact of travelling.
“I think that the way that you’re transported backwards and forwards from the hospital is great,” she said.
“The downside is that, sometimes, with the flight times, you’ll have an appointment at nine o’clock in the morning, and then they’ll put you on the 8pm flight back from Southampton, and so it can be a really long day. But, you know, that’s just the logistics of living on an island, I think.”
