Abortion clinics to advertise on television
Watchdog changes rules in bid to stem rising tide of teenage pregnancies
Digg
del.icio.us
Facebook
Reddit
Google
Stumble Upon
Fark
Newsvine
YahooBuzz
Bebo
Twitter
Independent Minds
enlarge
Television ads for abortions will be allowed for the first time under the biggest shake-up of advertising rules for 50 years to be announced today.
In a move which the advertising watchdog acknowledges will offend members of the public, ads for pregnancy advisory services will be allowed in prime-time evening slots on the major channels: ITV, Channel 4, Sky and other broadcasters.
Britain's biggest independent pregnancy advisory service, whose clinicians perform abortions as well, said it would immediately consider running ads. "Absolutely," said Julie Douglas, who is head of marketing at Marie Stopes International. "I don't know if we could afford to do it in prime-time TV, but it would be a very interesting thing to do."
The rule changes coincide with new government efforts to reduce the number of teenage pregnancies in Britain which, at 42 per 1,000 under-18s, has the highest rate in Europe.
Advisory services will be allowed to reach out to viewers of soap operas, documentaries and films. Clinics which do not offer abortions will have to make the point clear to viewers to avoid any confusion.
Pro-life groups have accused the advertising watchdog of showing "bias" against anti-abortion campaigners in proposing the changes which, they said, would increase the number of abortions. "It will mean that abortion is promoted as a solution to women's problems," said John Smeaton, the national director of the Society for the Protection of the Unborn Child.
The Broadcasting Committee on Advertising Practice (BCAP), which covers TV and radio, and the Committee on Advertising Practice (CAP), which controls other media such as newspapers, magazines and billboards, have proposed the shake-up after spending 18 months reviewing 2,500 rules and regulations and more than 400 pieces of legislation.
Among their other proposals, condoms will be allowed to be advertised on all channels during prime-time and traditional medicine promoters will be allowed to advertise, making possible advertising for Prince Charles' Duchy Originals brand, which sells St John's Wort and other herbal products.
Rules will be tightened on environmental claims and on the advertising of computer games to children. A 12-week consultation will be held on the changes. If approved, they will come into force next year.
The Television Code does not deal specifically with family planning centres but they are indirectly banned from advertising through a prohibition on commercial services offering individual advice on personal problems.
Acknowledging potential public disquiet, the watchdog said: "BCAP considers that members of the audience who might be seriously offended by the nature of the advertised services are afforded adequate protection under rules that guard against offence and ensure that advertisements are suitably and sensitively scheduled."
A spokesman for the Advertising Standards Authority, which is overseeing the consultation, said: "The proposed rule on pregnancy advisory services would, in theory, allow abortion clinics to advertise.
"However, as this service is normally accessed via a referral from a GP or hospital, it is unlikely that we are going to start seeing ads for them."
Marie Stopes International, however, was enthusiastic about the idea. "We have often thought about it and we would do it extremely sensitively and informatively rather than just plugging our organisation," said Ms Douglas. The service advertises in the Yellow Pages but receives most of its work through internet search engines.
The Society for the Protection of the Unborn Child accused the ASA of not allowing a "level playing field". "We survive on a shoestring. We cannot afford to advertise," said Mr Smeaton.
Andrew Brown, chairman of CAP and BCAP, said: "The UK advertising codes are widely recognised for setting a high bar for social responsibility. Our priority is to ensure that the rules remain relevant for the future so consumers can continue to enjoy and trust the ads they see... We sought the views of industry and policy-makers and now we want to hear from all other interested parties, including the people that matter the most in advertising, the general public." The consultation closes on 19 June.
View all comments that have been posted about this article.
Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.
- Print Article
- Email Article
-
Click here for copyright permissions
Copyright 2009 Independent News and Media Limited
Comments
Kids need role models but the media is such that the winner of this summer's Big Brother is as good a candidate as any. As for the fear-mongering government, their recent immoral rewarding of failure and deep rooted unfairness highlights the fundamental problem.
What evidence is there for this 'after the horse has bolted' (no pun intended) policy?
Why did I leave the NHS? Why did I leave the UK?
Oh yeah.
You use the terminology 'unborn children' even though the stage at which the majority of abortions are carried out, the foetuses involved do not resemble children in any way. In fact a report by the british medical journal in 2006 concluded that they cannot feel pain because that is a process which requires mental development outside of the womb.
Abortion is not a choice that can be taken lightly, and is mostly the result of a long thought out decision by the woman involved. However I believe that if the adverts raise awareness in an appropriate manner then I back the decision.
Reading the article though (which some commentators here seem not to have done), it states clearly that it is unlikely abortion clinics will use the decision to advertise. In fact only one spokesperson from Marie Stopes International mooted the idea of advertising and she then remarked if it would be done, it would be "extremely sensitive".
Oh, and one more thing @marekc. You claim that the "government has got us into [a mess] by rejecting the bible as the guidepost for moral decisions". Would this be the same bible that advocates genocide, rape, capital punishment for those working on sundays and infanticide?
It is still considered 'offensive' or 'insensitive' to show the pro life views held by many, on tv, with only one documentary in recent years - probably ever - revealing just what is involved in abortion; yet now it is considered a good think to promote it amongst our vulnerable youth.
I trust the long term effects on women have been considered in this rush to 'save the planet'. Save Our Souls, i say
These are young biological adults, and only our necessarily prolonged educational requirements have assigned them the status of children. To call them 'immature' is just a vague expression of disapproval.
If it's thought practicable for older single mothers to go out to work, why is it not practicable for young single mothers to continue their education? Money would be much better spent on child care for this purpose than on abortions, discouragement campaigns, social worker 'intervention', or the Dickensian institutions that have been proposed.
It seems that teenage mothers represent the third stage of puritanism. First there was disapproval of all sex outside marriage. That's a thing of the past, what with Cosmo-type soft porn readily available and even the Independent advertising the '10 best sex toys'. Then it was disapproval only of 'unwed mothers' of all ages. Fortunately, that has largely gone also, with only right-wing commentators still using the term 'illegitimacy'.
But the bigotry had to go somewhere, didn't it, so now it's only the teenage, mostly if not all unmarried, mothers who are in the firing line.
Have these politicians and journalists no heart? Well, the answer is clear as regards the politicians. But can the journalists not stop to think of what it must be like to have a child that you love and are working hard to care for, and to be repeatedly told that that child shouldn't have been born, that your love and work are worthless, and that you yourself are an enemy of society?
Society is changing. Women of all ages no longer regard marriage as essential to child-raising. Economic adjustments, other than welfare payments, could easily be made if it weren't for prejudice.
But it's easier to demonize young mothers and to promote abortions.
When I worked in an ebd school this was the aim of most of the girls. The cycle is self sustaining as the majority of the kids had single parents with problem backgrounds. We need to remove this incentive. Basic needs should be met; shelter and food. But not so much as to make a life on benefits mean you are better off than others trying to work for a living. The dash to get pregnant would be averted and the number of terminations reduced accordingly.
It won't take long, latest procedures make it painless and for this week only it's half price with 10% of your next visit. If you can't afford it you don't have to pay till next March, interest free.
Then after they find the advertising campaign is so successful (they usually are, aren't they?) they will open clinics in all major shopping complexes and maybe a drop-in centre at Asda or Tesco, so you can have it done while shopping for your baked beans.
A woman's right to choose, yes, but you know what I mean ?
There are many parts to the 'Holy' Bible, each & every one a 'flag of convenience'.
I must admit that I find advertising abortion clinics distasteful but I also find it distasteful that an advocate of an outmoded & discredited theological belief should use it as, what almost amounts to, a political platform.
As koopaman rightly implies, supporters of the Bible have no right whatsoever to adopt a moral high ground.
Christendom has a lot to answer for.
If in doubt, Sabbatini's 'Torquemada & the Spanish Inquisition' makes excellent reading.
Apparently there was none more pious & aesthetic than 'Frey Thomaso'!
Each implant lasts 3 years so one at 12 then one at 15 would see girls though until they're 18. I know there are side effects (I had headaches and light stomach cramps for a few weeks) but weighing up feeling some discomfort against becoming pregnant and having to raise a child I know exactly which I would chose.
I wouldn't dream of expecting this to be enforced on those Religions that do not believe in contraception, even if I don't understand that attitude, but making it compulsory for others would surely drop our teenage pregnancy rate to practically nothing.
If that is too far then perhaps we just need to promote contraceptive injections better. No-one had mentioned it to me as an option and I found out it existed when I was trying to find an alternative to the pill as I often forgot about taking it.
Watchdog changes rules in bid to stem rising tide of teenage pregnancies
By Martin Hickman, Consumer Affairs Correspondent
Is this good for the teacher and students? I think so. They will learn faster then the books.
What constitute an advertisement on abortion, I wonder. The syrups that are given, the beds used, or re-used, injection sterilized, the chairs, the ropes and the steel belts to keep those who move a lot.
I definitely must not miss the first and the last episode. The doctors will come, tie the patients, the father and the mother chewing the nail, the daughter screaming, ?But I want my baby?. Why are you not allowing my lawyers to come in and so forth? At what price the Ads will be determined by the demand.
I thank you
Firozali A. Mulla
Let me now be strictly scientific:
First let me be over generous and grant that a fetus is not a human being (although my dictionary tells me that it is), and that it does not feel pain, and that it is not self aware (ok, this may be true). Now are these the reason why we can wantonly dispose of a fetus?
Deny these first: 1. A fetus is a living organism.
2. A fetus contains all the information that defines the individual.
3. In less than nine months the fetus would become a cuddly baby. In two years time
it begins to talk and ask questions; In a short span of eighteen years it becomes
an adult member of society and so on.
In short, a fetus or even a human zygote for that matter is an integral part of our humanity.
Deny or disprove these assertions fellow human beings.
Living with a life you didn't want will take as long to overcome as living with abortion..
The government proposal is to stop unwanted teenage pregnancies through the medium of television. Abortions are not good but neither are unwanted pregnancies.
What a supremely fatuous claim. And what a way to condemn young children to even more abject poverty than they already live in.
I blame the media and its disgusting display of sex for all ages.
The media is the one condoning promiscuity in young adults (and old children, for that matter) and now they want to publicise this 'solution'?
I'm pro-choice, but I don't see why they need to advertise on TV...? Is that what they think is the only way to get through to people? That may be so, in which case the media as a whole should be more careful about the message it sends.
The media just reflects and magnifies our society - it has not caused British girls to be the most drunken, diseased, irresponsible and sluttich in Europe. Still, at leat we're champions ate something...
The sex education debate is a red herring - more sex education is NOT the solution to this. More stigma and punishing those who behave in certain ways is, as well as taking away all benefits to teen mothers and taking their babies from them and adopting them out.
As usual the government has got it wrong. Countries like Greece, Spain, Italy have no sex eduaction and are very conservative, and kids have access to porn too - and yet, no girl would like to lose her reputation so waits till she is adult before having sex. British girls just have no shame, that's all. Perhaps we need lessons in shame in schools?
Actually, the stigma against teenage pregancies is a recent thing that as usual society follows blindly. If you look into the past teenagers at 14 would be responsible, possibly married and bearing children - and it was socially acceptable.
And just because we have the highest teenage pregnancy rate in Europe doesn't mean that there aren't girls else where doing the same! It just means the rates are slightly lower. So in fact, I think you will find that there are girls in other countries that do the same..........
Maybe if England is such a mess you should move elsewhere.....
If the government would awaken from its medieval slumber and allow advertisements for condoms, birth control pills and morning after pills, abortion would not be as necessary. But in the end, it is the woman who is carrying the fertilized egg who alone has the right to make a decision concerning her body, and if she choses abortion--that is her right--as she is living a mortal life--she is no longer an evolving cellular structure.
Hey. That?s my hobby you?re condemning.
Atheist bus ? Canadian Atheist bus ? Atheist buses in Barcelona, Madrid & Malaga ? Bus Kampagne, Germany ? Bus humaniste (français), Québec, Canada ? ? Campagna Bus, Italy ? Finland Atheist bus ? Dutch Atheist bus campaign ? Atheist trams in Zagreb, Slovenia banned