Complaint
This programme looked at independent centres in the UK which offer support and advice to women facing unplanned pregnancies. It investigated allegations some of those centres were providing pregnant women with inappropriate advice and inaccurate information, and were using unduly coercive tactics to discourage women from considering the option of an abortion. A viewer complained about the absence of a 鈥渂alanced perspective鈥 and that the programme gave a misleading impression of the conduct of such organisations as a whole. The ECU considered whether the programme met the requirements for due impartiality set out in the 麻豆官网首页入口 Editorial Guidelines.
Outcome
The programme set out evidence it had uncovered, which included secretly recorded conversations with advice counsellors, and interviews with a range of relevant organisations. The reporter explained Panorama contacted all 57 independent crisis pregnancy centres in the UK which advertise their services online; it did so posing as women seeking information about the options open to them, including abortion. She set out the results of those initial inquiries so viewers were left in no doubt the programme鈥檚 evidence indicated it was a minority of crisis pregnancy advice centres which appeared to be offering inappropriate support and information. In the ECU鈥檚 view there was a clear public interest in reporting the evidence some centres are failing to provide adequate advice and counselling and Panorama was entitled to focus on this aspect.
The ECU also examined concerns about the decision to include contributions from three specialists on pregnancy advice. In its view the audience were given appropriate information about the experience and affiliations of each, and would have understood they were expressing professional opinions about the information and advice offered by the three crisis pregnancy centres filmed by the programme. Their inclusion ensured viewers heard an appropriate range of views and were aware of informed medical opinion.
听
Not Upheld