In February 2025, the National Police Chiefs' Council (NPCC) published updated practice guidance on investigating child deaths, replacing the 2014 ACPO Guide. The most significant amendments concern the investigation of pregnancy terminations conducted outside the legally permitted circumstances.
The guidance states that such investigations may be required from “several sources,” and while stillbirths resulting from unlawful terminations are rare, it sets out detailed instructions for police to follow. The updated guidance follows the high-profile prosecution and recent acquittal of Nicola Packer, who was investigated for allegedly administering a noxious substance to terminate her pregnancy at home beyond the legal time limit for abortion during the COVID-19 pandemic. Packer's case drew significant public attention, highlighting the complexities and legal risks faced by individuals seeking reproductive healthcare under restrictive conditions. Her acquittal underscores concerns about the criminalisation of abortions and the potential infringement on bodily autonomy.
Section 10.4.4 of the new guidance instructs police to establish the knowledge and intention of the pregnant person to determine whether an offence has been committed, examining disclosures made by the individual, witness accounts, digital communications, internet search histories, fertility or period-tracking app data, and medical records. Although the guidance notes that consent is preferable, it confirms that police may access medical records without it.
The 2014 ACPO guidance focused solely on the procedures for investigating child deaths and made no mention of unlawful terminations. In contrast, the 2025 update has been published amidst an intense and ongoing global discourse surrounding reproductive rights and abortion access, with some countries expanding access to safe and legal abortion services, whilst others have imposed more restrictive measures. Against this backdrop, it can be argued that the guidance encroaches upon Article 8 rights —the right to respect for private and family life – as protected under Section 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998. Notably, the NPCC suggests that reports of illegal terminations may come not only from medical professionals but also from friends or family, increasing the risk of misuse, whether negligent or malicious.
The controversial nature of the guidance is echoed in the ongoing case of Constance Marten and Mark Gordon at the Old Bailey, prosecuted following the death of their baby while fleeing social services. Gordon has claimed the police search contributed to the child's death, drawing attention to the complex balance between safeguarding and state intrusion.
While the need to investigate child deaths cannot be overstated, the new guidance has raised serious concerns about increased state involvement in matters of bodily autonomy and the personal grief associated with miscarriage. The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists has criticised the guidance for potentially criminalising those experiencing miscarriage or who choose to terminate their pregnancies independently.
The guidance effectively broadens the police's investigative scope rather than formally expanding police powers without parliamentary oversight. It remains to be seen whether Parliament will review the policy and assess its compatibility with fundamental human rights and principles of medical confidentiality, and to determine whether the state should proceed with investigating miscarriages in this manner.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
