For the past few years, polling gains, local election victories and Nigel Farage’s increasingly dominant presence in Westminster have all fuelled questions about what a Reform government would mean for the country’s future. But at what cost to women?
The answer is not confined to a single manifesto pledge or campaign speech. Instead, it emerges as a continuously flowing river of political ideas that touches upon healthcare, reproductive rights and equality legislation. Whilst Reform introduces many of its proposals in an effort to restore fairness and strengthen the traditional family, critics dispute that the long-term impact could fundamentally reshape the legal and social protections upon which many women rely.
What is becoming progressively more difficult to ignore, however, is that the polemic surrounding women’s rights has steered its sails towards the centre of British politics, forcing voters to ponder upon not only what Reform promises to protect but also what its wider policies could alter.
Protection or replacement?
Perhaps no policy illustrates this more clearly than Reform UK’s commitment to repeal the Equality Act 2010.
For over a decade, the Act has moulded the base of Britain’s anti-discrimination framework, establishing legislation that protects individuals from discrimination on the grounds of sex, disability, race and religion, providing the legal system through which millions of employees challenge unequal treatment.
Reform argues that this narrative has become overly bureaucratic, costly and driven by identity politics, having repeatedly sworn to abolish diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) policies, portraying them as “divisive and economically damaging”, while MP Suella Braverman has argued that Britain is being “ripped apart” and must transform into “a society defined by meritocracy not tokenism”.
For women, the act matters because the law functions less as a political symbol than as an invisible shield underpinning everyday working life. Removing it without a clearly defined alternative therefore sparks doubt about the ideology and legal clarification. The need for the act is proven in legal cases such as Asda Stores Ltd v Brierley 2019, in which the Supreme Court ruled that female retail workers could compare their roles to predominantly male distribution centre staff, allowing them to bring forward major equal pay claims.
The politics of motherhood
Reform has persistently advocated that its approach does not weaken women’s rights but instead adjusts them around motherhood and family life.
Its proposed Women and Motherhood Protection Act, despite much backlash from trade unions who described it as “shameless and deceptive”, aims to extend the time limit for pregnancy discrimination claims from three months to 12, strengthen redundancy protections for new mothers, introduce additional rights surrounding fertility treatment and provide new leave entitlements following miscarriage or stillbirth.
In isolation, many of these proposals, which argue against women being forced to choose between career and children, would receive broad public support; a sliver of relatability to party comments from the likes of Braverman who stated that “No woman should ever feel that becoming a mother will hold her back or leave her with fewer opportunities” and that “Britain should become one of the best places in the world to start and raise a family”.
Naturally these policies aren’t without their flood of criticism. Organisations including Pregnant Then Screwed argue that pregnancy discrimination protections derive many women from the existing equality framework. A similar view is shared by Trades Union Congress (TUC) general secretary Paul Nowak who concluded that “All women—whether mums or not—are at risk from a Reform government that wants to turn the clock back”.
Economic independence
The party proposes increasing the personal tax allowance to £20,000, introducing a transferable marriage allowance—which cuts the highest earner’s bill each year—restructuring child benefit towards younger children and creating financial incentives intended to make it easier for one parent to remain at home during early childhood.
Avid reform supporters argue these initiatives would give families greater autonomy, enabling parents to choose home-based childcare rather than relying upon expensive nursery provision, saving an astonishing £7,000–£16,000 per year.
However, the beneficiaries would not be evenly distributed. Nothing is ever that simple, is it?
This is proven by the fact that these tax incentives linked to marriage favour single-income households over single parents, while maintaining restrictions such as the two-child benefit cap which could remove the safety nets for larger families as well as the 15% of UK families which consist of single mothers.
Reproductive rights and political realignment
Despite Reform not proposing a ban of abortion entirely, several party figures have queried existing legislation. Nigel Farage has described the 24-week legal limit as “utterly ludicrous” at a 2025 news conference, while Braverman has stated that the party would strive to reverse the recent decriminalisation of abortion in England and Wales.
But such a rapid change would “mean women once again facing investigation, arrest and even imprisonment for ending their own pregnancy, treatment that belongs to another era entirely and has no place in modern society”, warned Labour MP Tonia Antoniazzi, who put forward the amendment that decriminalised abortion in England and Wales.
As well as this, research conducted by openDemocracy examining social media activity identified an astounding 40% increase in abortion-related messaging among Reform politicians, supporters and associated right-wing networks such as GB News, with the word itself being posted 1,063 times between April 2024 and April 2026. These posts were shared around 153,000 times and received more than 800,000 likes.
“These findings expose a coordinated attempt to import the US anti-abortion playbook into Britain—disinformation, moral panic, inflammatory language and pressure on politicians to roll back rights”, said Kerry Abel, chair of Abortion Rights UK.
“When Reform figures, far-right parties and supportive media voices echo this rhetoric, they are helping to drive moves to strip people of basic bodily autonomy”, Abel continued.
The battle of the parties on gender ideology
Reform has pledged to bar what it calls “transgender ideology” within schools, in turn bolstering biological single-sex spaces and redefining legal protections surrounding sex, with the intent of restoring protection of women’s privacy and safeguarding female-only services.
The Conservatives have similarly advocated clarifying sex within equality legislation, while Labour’s Keir Starmer has increasingly stressed the importance of protecting single-sex spaces alongside respecting transgender people with the intent of treating everyone with dignity and as human beings.
But in a BBC Question Time debate, he said he agreed with Tony Blair’s remark, that “biologically, a woman is with a vagina and a man is with a penis”.
His statement spurred acclaimed Harry Potter author J.K. Rowling to critically write in The Times newspaper that she would “struggle” to vote for him. She said she was driven to come forward by “freedom of speech and observable truth” and believed Labour was “dismissive and often offensive” towards women struggling to retain sex-based rights.
The broader picture
Supporters see a programme that strengthens families, rewards responsibility and restores fairness. Critics see significant uncertainty surrounding workplace rights, reproductive freedom, healthcare provision and the future of equality legislation.
As Reform continues to reshape Britain’s political landscape, understanding what it could mean for women requires looking beyond campaign slogans and headline debates. After all, the most significant changes rarely arrive through a single controversial policy but rather a complicated chain that takes years to unravel.
