Chamber and committees

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I am not sure whether my vote went through—it has not come through on my app. I would have voted yes.

As other members have done, I thank colleagues on the Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee for their work on the issue, and those stakeholders who have engaged with them. I also commend the petitioner, Nicola Murray, for her bravery and tenacity in bringing the issue to the Parliament and sharing her personal testimony, which the committee described as “profoundly moving”, on a subject that could not be more sensitive or personal. Her on-going work to create spaces for other women who have experienced the loss of a pregnancy through violence or abuse to provide comfort and support to one another is invaluable to many.

Through Nicola Murray’s work, the shocking reality of the scale of the issue has been brought into sharp focus. Every day in Scotland, four pregnant women will be the victim of domestic violence. Those figures, which are already stark, are likely to be underreported, based on what we know about the reporting of domestic violence more generally.

Pregnancy is one of the most dangerous times for victims of domestic abuse. Almost one in three women who suffer abuse experience it for the first time while they are pregnant. That makes domestic abuse the most commonly experienced threat to the health and wellbeing of women during pregnancy.

As many members will recognise from their constituents, violence against woman causes devastating physical and psychological impacts for its victims, and it has wide-ranging costs for them, their families and their communities as a whole.

Brodie’s Trust, which was set up by the petitioner, has reported that many women who have suffered pregnancy loss as a result of abuse had never spoken about what had happened to them before they found the group. They brought with them deep and specific trauma, which was often wrapped up in self-blame. All too often, their experiences are still hidden.

The Domestic Abuse (Scotland) Act 2018 was a welcome step forward in creating new statutory domestic abuse offences, which made it easier for certain forms of abuse and coercive and controlling behaviour to be prosecuted. The briefing notes from that time state that the fact that a pregnancy was lost as the result of domestic abuse could be considered as an important factor in sentencing. However, as things stand in Scots law, there is no specific offence of ending a pregnancy through violence or abusive behaviour.

In other parts of the UK, the Infant Life (Preservation) Act 1929 may be used to prosecute someone who attacks a pregnant woman and causes the loss of her unborn child, but that piece of legislation stands alone, and it is nearly 100 years old.

Across Scotland, campaigners such as the petitioner, Nicola Murray, and other groups, organisations and stakeholders work tirelessly every day to protect, advocate for and support victims of domestic abuse.

Recently, I spoke in the chamber about how it is imperative that we treat victims and survivors of crime with compassion, and the fact that we owe it to them to listen to and act on their experiences and concerns. We must do more to ensure that they feel not only that they are treated with compassion but that they have received the justice that they deserve and that the perpetrator has received the punishment that they are due.

Domestic violence is a pernicious issue, and there is still much work to be done in changing attitudes and breaking stigma and taboos.

The loss of a pregnancy is always heartbreaking. When such a loss is caused by abuse or through violence, the trauma and emotional pain must surely be magnified beyond recognition. It is for that reason that I welcome the opportunity to speak on the issue today, and I thank the committee for bringing its motion to the chamber. Most of all, I thank Nicola for bringing her petition to Parliament.

15:39  

That is all well and good in terms of the agencies, but in terms of families and those who are using the substances, what sort of education and outreach is there to equip them with that information about what is emerging and what the dangers are of those particular substances?

Good morning—I got that in just under the wire.

Minister, as you may know, I asked the previous panel about synthetic opioids, which you mentioned in your opening statement—you spoke about the threats that they pose and the increased risk. There was a gentle challenge back from members of the first panel, who said—I am paraphrasing rather than quoting—that there might be too much focus on synthetic opioids, and that people’s lives are being impacted by, and, indeed, people are dying as a result of, the kind of drug use that existed prior to synthetic opioids coming into the picture.

What are the Government and your officials doing to address that threat? What additional measures are you putting in place in relation to synthetic opioids?

Before I continue, I refer members to my entry in the register of members’ interests: I am a nurse and have a bank nurse contract with NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, and I recently worked in Greater Glasgow and Clyde’s alcohol and drug recovery service.

You touched briefly on toxicology, and earlier, in a previous answer, someone mentioned delays in toxicology. What work is being done to ensure that we get toxicology results back in a more efficient manner, not only for academic interest but for families?

I refer members to my entry in the register of members’ interests. I hold a bank nurse contract with NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, and I recently worked in an alcohol and drug recovery service on a bank shift.

Russell Findlay has already covered much of what I was going to ask on synthetic opioids, which we have known about for some time. Public Health Scotland published a rapid action drug alerts and response—RADAR—alert in January 2023, which was updated in December, and Dundee alcohol and drug partnership noted in its submission an increased risk associated with emergent synthetic opioids. So, what more do we need to do to tackle the issue and get ahead of that danger that is coming towards us?

I will come back to Kirsten Horsburgh in a second, because she might be able to wrap up her answer with her response to my next question.

Dr Fletcher mentioned harm reduction and the use of naloxone. We have seen a decrease in the use of emergency naloxone, and I am keen to hear from our witnesses how they interpret that. Is it a sign that it is not needed as much, or does it indicate that people are not using it because they do not see that they need it or are unable to access it?

Kirsten, can you wrap up both of those questions when you answer?

I am sorry, minister, but can we stick to toxicology? My question is quite specific: what is being done to speed up toxicology results?

It is an important issue that is raised with me as a constituency MSP, and it is also very important in terms of giving people answers. I will leave it there.

Thank you.