← Back to Westminster Hall Debates
Reproductive Coercion
24 March 2026
Lead MP
Natalie Fleet
Bolsover
Lab
Responding Minister
Alex Davies-Jones
Tags
Crime & Law EnforcementJustice & CourtsWomen & Equalities
Word Count: 3977
Other Contributors: 2
At a Glance
Natalie Fleet raised concerns about reproductive coercion in Westminster Hall. A government minister responded.
Key Requests to Government:
The lead MP asks the government to acknowledge reproductive coercion as a distinct crime and provide clearer recognition in law, including greater awareness and training for legal professionals. She also calls for patterns of coercive behavior involving deception and control over reproductive autonomy to be properly examined rather than dismissed.
How the Debate Unfolded
MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said:
Lead Contributor
The speaker highlights the case of Olivia Nervo, a victim of reproductive coercion by her partner Matthew Pringle, who used deception and legal threats to control Liv's life. The issue extends beyond this isolated incident, with statistics showing that half of women polled have experienced some form of reproductive coercion. This includes being pressured into unprotected sex (33%), having contraception sabotaged (10%), or forced to terminate a pregnancy they wanted to keep (15%).
Jim Shannon
DUP
Strangford
Commended the hon. Lady for bringing forward the issue and mentioned that in Northern Ireland, conviction on indictment for domestic abuse and coercive control can lead to up to 14 years' imprisonment, while in England and Wales it is five years, suggesting equal severity across the UK. The Minister for her positive response to the hon. Member for Bolsover (Natalie Fleet). In my earlier intervention, I gave the example of Northern Ireland, where the sentence for coercive behaviour is 14 years, compared to five years in England and Wales. He asked if the Government would consider strengthening the sentence.
Stella Creasy
Lab Co-op
Walthamstow
Asked if the case of reproductive coercion should be part of Baroness Levitt's review of family courts, highlighting that women have been victimised by how these courts operate.
Government Response
Alex Davies-Jones
Government Response
It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Mr Dowd. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Bolsover (Natalie Fleet) for bringing forward this really important debate. This debate matters because controlling or coercive behaviour is one of the most harmful, least visible and most misunderstood forms of domestic abuse causing deep and lasting harm, yet so often difficult to recognise, disclose and even evidence. The statutory guidance on controlling or coercive behaviour already recognises reproductive coercion including restricting access to contraception, refusing to use contraception, forcing pregnancy, deception about contraception, or forcing or denying access to abortion, IVF or any other reproductive procedure. Reproductive choice is a basic human right; the long-term emotional, psychological and sometimes physical harm this abuse causes must be understood. The Domestic Abuse Act 2021 strengthened the framework by explicitly recognising controlling or coercive behaviour as domestic abuse extending the offence to ex-partners and family members who do not live together. Since 2015, police recorded more than 54,000 offences last year and CPS prosecutions have gone up by 38% compared with the previous year, to more than 1,500 defendants prosecuted. The Government are committed to updating the guidance on controlling or coercive behaviour by the end of this year reflecting the latest policy and practice including clearer recognition of reproductive coercion. More than £1 billion is being invested over the next three years to support victims of violence against women and girls, including domestic abuse survivors with funding for safe accommodation, advocacy, counselling and specialist services. The Ministry of Justice will invest £550 million in victim support services over the next three years of the spending review period.
▸
Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy
About Westminster Hall Debates
Westminster Hall debates are a chance for MPs to raise important issues affecting their constituents and get a response from a government minister. Unlike Prime Minister's Questions, these debates are more in-depth and collaborative. The MP who secured the debate speaks first, other MPs can contribute, and a minister responds with the government's position.