FACT CHECK: Correcting Rupa Huq

Rupa Huq made several shockingly inaccurate statements whilst introducing a debate regarding buffer zones around abortion clinics in Westminster Hall yesterday.  Let’s get the facts straight.

The most outrageous falsehood that permeated Westminster Hall, and the ears of her fellow Parliamentarians, was regarding fetal development. Naturally, this is not the favourite topic of those who want to further a pro-abortion agenda. However, to dismiss scientific facts as untrue is utterly unacceptable in c.21st UK Parliament.

Seeking to demonise prolife activity in every possible way, Huq criticised prolife groups’ literature. She talked of “the bogus science of the information leaflets.” These, she said, show “how developed the fetus is at 24 weeks, it is shown as having fingernails and things when that is just not the case.”


It is almost unbelievable that Huq could have genuinely questioned whether a baby has fingernails at 24 weeks. It is clearly stated on the NHS website that at 11 weeks: “There are fingernails.”

“All these things”

Let me bring to the fore an article in the Independent that was released the same day that Rupa was dismissing the idea that a fetus of 24 weeks has “all these things.”

Here is baby Flynn who was born and survived when his mother was 23 weeks pregnant. (This gestational age is counted from the mother’s last menstrual period.) The embryonic age of Flynn when he was born is closest to 21 weeks. (This age more accurately represents the time since fertilisation/conception given “conception usually takes place about two weeks after your last period” NHS)

A fetus of 21 weeks since fertilisation. And he is surviving. Guess what, he had “all these things” needed for survival.

Is Flynn a fetus? No. He is an absolutely tiny and very vulnerable baby.

It is deplorable that an MP so involved with issues of abortion within parliament is spreading scientific falsehoods.  She talks of women needing to be protected from prolife people who might make them feel bad or uncomfortable about seeking abortions. However, the biggest disservice to women considering abortions is to deceive them. That is disgraceful.

She talks of women having informed choices with “medical advice”

Let’s take this seriously.

Medical expertise informs us very well of the development of the baby in the womb. Prolife groups don’t need to lie because science itself reveals the astonishing development of the baby in the womb.

Not only do babies have fingernails from 11 weeks, the NHS website shows very clearly that vital developmental stages happen incredibly early:

Week 5 of pregnancy: [3 weeks from fertilisation] (“the time of the first missed period, when most women are only just beginning to think they may be pregnant”) NHS:

“The heart is forming.” 

Week 7 of pregnancy: [5 weeks from fertilisation] NHS:

“The brain is growing rapidly.” 

Week 9 of pregnancy: [7 weeks from fertilisation]  NHS:

“The baby’s face is slowly forming. The eyes are bigger…There’s a mouth and a tongue with tiny taste buds. The hands and feet are developing. The major internal organs, such as the heart, brain, lungs, kidneys and gut, continue developing”

Week 10 of pregnancy: [8 weeks from fertilisation] NHS:

“The heart is now fully formed. It beats 180 times a minute.”

And incredibly NHS:

“Just 12 weeks after your last period, the foetus is fully formed. All the organs, muscles, limbs and bones are in place, and the sex organs are well developed. From now on, the baby has to grow and mature.”

12 weeks

19 weeks

24 weeks









It is hugely inconvenient for pro-abortion advocates, such as Rupa Huq, that all this isn’t “bogus science.” Of course they are desperately trying to convince people that it is, how easy their fight would be if it were.

When one highlights that the NHS offers ultra scans for pregnant mothers at 12 weeks and describe it as

“very exciting to “see” your baby in the womb, often moving his or her hands and legs”

it is obviously apparent that normalising abortion requires us to be deliberately ignorant, to put hands over eyes and fingers in ears, to ignore the humanity of the baby in the womb.


“Informed choice” is the last thing pro-abortion fighters actually want.

Huq aggressively suggested vigils outside clinics is “controlling women in a misogynistic way.” A society that withholds facts to encourage women to abort, is the true meaning of “controlling women in a misogynistic way.”

Please note that, if you write a reply or comment, others will be able to see it. We reserve the right to delete comments that are antagonistic, offensive, or off-topic. If in doubt, read our comments policy.

6 people are talking about FACT CHECK: Correcting Rupa Huq

  1. richard johnson says:

    Rupa Huq is my mp and she really is a very dangerous amoral woman. She has not real convictions on any issue. her only reason for being an mp is to climb the greasy pole to power and she has chosen to use the murder of babies to achieve this

  2. Maeve Barnes says:

    The trouble is, must people won't write letters. An online petition widely publicised by all pro-life organisations is what is needed to highlight the strength of public opinion. Why don't life, spuc and others join forces?

  3. Peter Davey says:

    You need to capture this evidence from the NHS web site before it is removed, as I'm fairly sure it will be.

    1. Pauline Gately says:

      Pauline Gately

      Wise counsel, Peter. Thank you. I know they are not to be trusted having battled with them previously.

      I think the more people that capture these webpages the better. I found this: http://www.web2pdfconvert.com/. It works fine, is quick and easy and I have been using it for years without any problem. But if anyone has any concerns or better ideas it would be good to share them.

      Great blog Clare, thank you.

  4. Julia says:

    Is there some sort of petition to publicly hold her to account for this? I want her to state that she was wrong and apologise for slandering this charity. It is totally unacceptable for someone in her position to say such things.

    1. Clare Plasom-Scott says:

      Dear Julia,
      Thank you for your comment. Unfortunately as a charity we are unable to hold MPs to account for misinformation except to expose them publicly as this blog seeks to do. We would hope that once misinformation is exposed, members of the public would express their disappointment as they see fit, be this by writing letters or by tweeting to Rupa Huq. Given Life does not do vigils outside abortion clinics, it would be up to such organisations to file a complaint in this case, rather than Life. We completely agree that this inaccuracy is completely unacceptable.

Write a Reply or Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.