Continued: The final part of the Scottish Parliament debate on strangulation during sexual intercourse …
by Bill Heaney
Conservative MSP Liam Kerr told the parliament that Emily Drouet was a law student at the University of Aberdeen. She was kind, compassionate, intelligent and thoughtful. Emily died in 2016 when an incident occurred following a pattern of abuse by her boyfriend, Angus Milligan. The incident was initially treated as non-suspicious, but it later emerged that she had reported to the university an earlier assault that included strangulation.
Mr Kerr, pictured right, added: “At that time, non-fatal strangulation was poorly understood and often characterised as a minor assault. Police and medical professionals failed to recognise strangulation as a high-risk indicator of homicide. However, we know from the report, the study that has been referenced and the powerful motion for today’s debate that non-fatal strangulation is incredibly serious. It can directly cause internal injuries, including brain injury and hypoxia. It carries a high risk of delayed death and is one of the strongest predictors of future lethal violence.
“Because of that, the EmilyTest campaign was set up to demand that strangulation should always trigger an urgent medical response and enhanced police safeguarding, even where the victim appears outwardly unharmed.
“The campaign is also one of many calling for non-fatal strangulation to be a stand-alone offence, as it has been in England and Wales since 2022, and in Northern Ireland since 2023.
“It is certainly arguable that the absence of such an offence means that police and prosecutors lack a clear legal category, that data collection on incidents is poor, that the seriousness of strangulation might not be sufficiently recognised or deterred, and that public awareness of the life-threatening nature of strangulation remains low.
“Police Scotland and the Crown Office now recognise strangulation as a red flag for homicide risk, but absent such an offence, there is no statutory requirement that every report of strangulation should trigger an immediate medical assessment, specialist medical imaging or a specific risk or safeguarding review.
“From the start, the EmilyTest campaign—it can be found on emilytest.org if anyone who is watching is impacted or concerned by what they are hearing—demanded action, setting out clear and articulate deliverables through means, including a petition, for a stand-alone criminal offence.
“Here is my biggest concern: the Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee considered that petition last April; the Criminal Justice Committee examined it last summer; the Scottish Government’s programme for government stated that it would carry out a comprehensive assessment of the law to determine whether further action is needed; and the Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs updated the justice committee in November, saying that that comprehensive assessment would take place. In December, the Lord Advocate wrote to Fiona Drouet—who joins us in the public gallery today—acknowledging the concern and explaining the current position, but giving no firm direction forward.
“Now here we are, 11 weeks from the dissolution of this Parliament and all that that entails, and the overwhelming impression is that the issue is not being prioritised sufficiently. Nearly a decade on from Emily’s tragic death, the campaign tells me that it has yet to see tangible progress.
“Thanks to Claire Baker’s motion, the report that prompted it and all who contributed their time and expertise to it, the cabinet secretary [Angela Constance] has the chance, in her closing speech, to set out exactly what will be done to address the issue before May’s election. She must not countenance any delays. We have a duty to Emily and all those impacted by the vicious practice of non-fatal strangulation—we owe it to them. Close the gaps, act now and make sure that no woman becomes another victim of this appalling violence.”
Labour’s Justice spokesperson Pauline McNeill endorsed Claire Baker’s view that the work that Tess White and Michelle Thomson have done in this Parliament on violence against women is notable and should be recognised.
She told MSPs: “I was shocked to read that, every year, more than 20,000 victims in the UK experience strangulation. I attended the briefing that Claire Baker hosted with the Women’s Support Project and Beira’s Place, which opened my eyes to something that, at the time, I knew very little about. It alarmed me to learn that, according to the UK Crown Prosecution Service, children were present for more than a third of non-fatal strangulation offences—I found that staggering.
“At the briefing hosted by Claire Baker and others, I learned that the timeline of being strangled goes like this: in 6.8 seconds, the person is rendered unconscious; in 14 seconds, there is anoxic seizure; in 15 seconds, there is loss of bladder control; and, in only 30 seconds, there is loss of bowel control.
“Many members have talked about strangulation leading to a fatality—it takes only 62 seconds before that could happen. It is clear from that timeline why non-fatal strangulation often occurs at the most dangerous stage of the escalation of violence associated with later homicide.
“I was particularly concerned to read about the normalisation that other members have talked about in relation to non-fatal strangulation, often known as choking, in young people’s sexual habits. Strangulation has seeped into popular culture and social media, and there are reports that it has even been mentioned as a sexual preference on dating apps. We must act to prevent that normalisation by educating both men and women about the consequences of non-fatal strangulation.
“There have been reports from sex education providers and teachers that they have been asked by children in school about how to safely choke a partner—needless to say, there is no way to safely do something like that. As has already been mentioned, a study found that 43 per cent of sexually active 16 and 17-year-olds in the UK had experienced it.
“Pornography is cited as the most common way for young people to learn about strangulation. Addressing the harms of extreme pornography must be central to our work on violence against women and girls. If we are to address violence against women and girls in the future, we need to confront the issue at the earliest opportunity, especially with children, to counter those damaging portrayals. We need to be clear that violent pornography normalises harm to women and girls. I was pleased to see the amendments to the UK’s Crime and Policing Bill that criminalised the possession and publication of pornographic pictures of strangulation or suffocation, with duties on platforms to study the proliferation of those images.
“The current framework is such that non-fatal strangulation is mainly treated as assault, which is defined in the common law as an attack on another person with evil intent. Penalties can range up to life imprisonment. Prosecutors are not required to prove visible injury or harm in order to secure a conviction for assault, provided that the act was intentional. However, as others have said, there are challenges in tracking how prevalent the issue is because there is no specific stand-alone crime and no individual marking system to accurately count and monitor such cases across Scotland.
“I think that, as Carol Mochan mentioned, it is worth exploring whether data could be collated at the Crown Office to give us at least an accurate picture of the scale of the problem. Although the issue has not been mentioned in the debate, members of this Parliament have raised the act of stealthing, which is the intentional act of secretly removing a condom or another barrier method without consent. That has also been prosecuted in our courts and is not a stand-alone crime.
“We cannot rule out having a crime of NFS. We have a different legal system in Scotland from that in England, so we have flexibility in law making, and doing that should not be ruled out. It should be part of the work of the Parliament in the new session to consider it, and it should form part of the strategy of the Government of the day—whoever that may be—for its work on violence against women and girls.
Her Labour colleague Monica Lennon MSP said the subject was close to her own heart and was impostant to everyone present.
She said: “I add my voice in support of the calls for the creation of a stand-alone offence of non-fatal strangulation. We cannot ignore the growing trend of sexual strangulation that is being normalised to a large extent by pornography and harmful so-called influencers, who are taking us backwards in society in so many respects.
“We cannot ignore that, because there is a link between intimate partner homicides and non-fatal strangulation. We need action to reduce such violence, to prevent harm and, as we have heard powerfully today from so many colleagues, to save lives.
“We stand here today with more research and knowledge than ever before. I am grateful that the research that other members have touched on covers multiple international jurisdictions, so we are not looking at just a Scottish or UK context.
“I pay tribute to Fiona Drouet—who is courageously with us today in the gallery—and to EmilyTest for the organisation’s fantastic work across the spectrum of gender-based violence, which we must tackle. I say that not just as a politician but as a mother who can now sleep a little better at night knowing that my daughter is studying in an institution that is fully signed up to the EmilyTest charter. Fiona and I met to discuss the work of EmilyTest at South Lanarkshire College, which is another institution in my parliamentary region. Knowing that that discussion is happening in our colleges and universities gives us extra peace of mind.
“However, we need to do much more. I think that we would all recognise that this issue is not down to one minister, one department or one agency. Just as we are showing cross-party working in the Parliament today, there needs to be a partnership approach.
“I will not talk about the worrying statistics, because those have already been covered. However, I was alarmed to read in the report from the Institute for Addressing Strangulation that the most common age at which respondents report first starting to strangle others or being strangled is 18 to 20.
“In preparing for the debate, I noticed that, just in December 2025, there was a big conference in Lancashire that brought together key stakeholders to shine a spotlight on non-fatal strangulation. Ministers may know about that conference, but if the cabinet secretary does not, it may be something to look into. It would be good to see something like that happen in Scotland, if nothing is already planned.
“What public health messages can we get out there? EmilyTest’s mission is to ensure that no other student ends up in Emily’s shoes. That mission sits in my heart today as we bring our debate to a close and before we hear from the cabinet secretary. We can look at the data and the legal arguments, but we know that it is the human stories that have an impact and change behaviours.
“I put on the record my support for the petition that went to the Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee and the motion that we are debating today. I hope that we can all work together to work with the Scottish Government to get the change that we all want to see.”
The Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs Angela Constance also thanked Claire Baker for bringing the important issue to the Parliament.
She said: “Over the past few years, I have had the opportunity to engage with Ms Baker on the matter, which has led to further Scottish Government activity with regard to exploring solutions. Principally, I pay tribute to survivors and researchers, as well as to Fiona Drouet. We should also acknowledge the work that has been done and the evidence that has been taken by two parliamentary committees, the Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee and the Criminal Justice Committee, in relation to this debate.
“I think that we are all horrified by the scale of the issue. As many members have acknowledged, non-fatal strangulation is extremely harmful. Choking reduces the flow of oxygen and can therefore cause damage to the brain and to the windpipe. Alongside the physical risks, anxiety, depression and loneliness are often associated with experiencing non-fatal strangulation.
“Non-fatal strangulation is also used—mainly by men—to exert coercive control in relationships; Claire Baker spoke about the total control that some men seek. There is evidence—again, as other members acknowledged—that those men are more likely to carry out severe violence. A few members spoke about how non-fatal strangulation is a red flag.
Last month, Parliament debated 16 days of activism highlighting men’s violence against women and girls.
“As many of us have acknowledged, Scotland has world-renowned domestic abuse legislation that addresses the dynamics of coercive and controlling behaviour.”
Tess White added to her earlier remarks: “I hear what the cabinet secretary says, and I am glad that she referred to the work of the Criminal Justice Committee.
She added: “However, has she reviewed the committee’s latest evidence from December? The professors on the panel had looked at the US, which introduced non-fatal strangulation as a stand-alone crime, state by state, and the evidence demonstrated that there was a clear correlation in that creating a stand-alone crime of non-fatal strangulation actually reduced deaths. That compelling evidence is the reason for holding this debate. If the cabinet secretary has not reviewed the data from those professors, will she now do so?”
Angela Constance said she was aware of that evidence.
She said: “Claire Baker, in her opening remarks, spoke about the importance of us all engaging with the evidence. I will reflect on the current position in Scots law and address some of the concerns that members have obliquely referenced, and outline the action that the Scottish Government is taking forward. We do not have closed minds on the issue and I think that, given some of the evidence that the Criminal Justice Committee took, there are aspects that need to be considered further.
First, with regard to what needs done, I acknowledge that it is clearly very important that we have the means by which to identify cases of non-fatal strangulation in order to address that aspect of abuse of women and girls. I know that every member in the chamber is committed to taking whatever action is needed to address such abuse. That includes enabling societal and cultural change to address the factors that risk normalising such behaviour. For example, we have agreed that the new offences in the UK Crime and Policing Bill that criminalise pornography featuring ‘strangulation or suffocation ‘will extend to Scotland if the bill is passed. I also welcome the updated NHS Inform web pages that provide information on fatal and non-fatal strangulation, and highlight that ‘there is no safe way to be strangled’ and that ‘It’s a criminal offence to cause harm through strangulation.”
I now turn to the proposal for a stand-alone offence—
Monica Lennon intervened however to say: “I appreciate the efforts that are being made, and the NHS Inform website is always worth a visit, but I am not sure that a huge number of 16, 17 and 18-year-olds are going on to that site.
Given the growing trend of non-fatal strangulation, which is worrying us all, what more can Government do to get out the message that there is no safe way to strangle or be strangled? How do we get that message into our classrooms and on to social media in a more positive way? What other levers can Government pull, so that we can support that message?
Angela Constance replied: “Ms Lennon raises an important point. The work that goes on in schools around the equally safe strategy and the curriculum input on healthy relationships—which, of course, focuses a lot on the importance of consent—is important in that regard. I will pick up further on the consultation that we will take forward and the survey information that Ms Baker and I have discussed. The point about online harms, particularly in relation to intimate images, will be a factor in the forthcoming consultation.
“On the issue of a stand-alone offence, I know that members are aware that the UK Parliament has legislated for a specific offence of non-fatal strangulation in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. It is important to recognise that was done mainly to address a specific issue in those jurisdictions where non-fatal strangulation that did not result in visible injury could only be prosecuted using the statutory offence of common assault, which carries a maximum penalty of six months’ imprisonment. Understandably, that was something that those jurisdictions wished to address.
“Non-fatal strangulation is already criminal under Scots law and can be dealt with using a range of offences. That is an important message to reiterate. It does not mean that minds are closed on the issue or that there is no further action to take forward. However, with regard to Ms Lennon’s point about education and giving out correct societal messages, it is important to be clear that non-fatal strangulation is already a criminal offence. The relevant offences include: common-law assault with penalties up to life imprisonment; sexual assault with penalties up to life imprisonment; and part of a course of conduct prosecuted as a domestic abuse offence with penalties up to 14 years’ imprisonment. The Crown Office, as the independent prosecutor, is clear that it approaches non-fatal strangulation seriously and that it uses those laws where the evidence supports their use.
“Another important factor to note is that, in contrast with the law in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, in Scotland there is no defence of consent to strangulation. That is a significant feature of the better protection that is offered in Scots law. Again, it is important to send out to our society and communities the message that there is no defence of consent to strangulation.
“I understand and respect deeply the view that creating a specific offence could send a message about the unacceptability of non-fatal strangulation and could help measure its prevalence. I recognise that those are important factors and that, by their very nature, those arguments are powerful. However, I want to guard against any risk of unintended consequences. I say that in light of the evidence that was highlighted by the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service in its evidence to the Criminal Justice Committee last year in relation to a specific offence as distinct from assault. The issue is that there would need to be corroboration specifically of the strangulation and not simply of the assault or domestic abuse. We have already heard from members today that one of the salient issues with non-fatal strangulation is that it often leaves no visible signs. The fact that corroboration would be required might mean that creating a specific offence would result in the underestimation of the true prevalence of the issue, as cases involving non-fatal strangulation might continue to be prosecuted as assault, sexual assault or domestic abuse.
“I stress that this is an issue that the Government and I take seriously. Although existing laws operate well in protecting victims and dealing with perpetrators, we will shortly publish a public consultation to seek views on this area of the law, as set out in our programme for government. We will continue to engage with views and with the evidence. As I mentioned, that consultation will also include a look at online harms—particularly in relation to intimate images—as well as [drinks] spiking, a statutory aggravation for offences against pregnant women, and prosecutorial powers to impose non-harassment.”