That would make sense! I think the civil servant in charge might also have a certain level of discretion with regards to how they represent the results - I did in my case.

I'm sorry, I didn't mean to imply that more responses mean nothing, just that bringing up a sensible consideration is more likely to affect outcomes than copying and pasting a response (which may have between no weight and a little weight with the policymakers)

There weren't many, so I don't know unfortunately. In this consultation you'd have a better chance because it's about a public-facing issue

Yes that's true, if they use statistics like this, similar or duplocated responses might count

I can confirm that copying and pasting doesn't move the needle, at least in consultations I've been involved with - they will put weight on people actually engaging with the ideas (Similarly feel free to skip or provide very short answers to questions you don't care much about and focus on the ones who care most about)

I can imagine a first step would be it being offered as an option to mothers. Many late term abortions happen with wanted babies after a serious diagnosis.

However this post doesn't seem to talk about the main drug used for late abortions in the UK? So I'm sceptical. https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng140/chapter/Recommendations#medical-abortion-after-236-weeks

This is entirely consistent with two other applications I know of from 2023, both of which were funded but experienced severe delays and poor/absent/straightforwardly unprofessional communication

"When life gives you Lemiens"?

Okay, sorry for misreading, the poll makes much more sense now! I've edited the first part of my comment at it doesn't make much sense

Sorry, did this always say externally? Maybe I just need better reading comprehension!