A company which makes self-swab kits for rape victims has threatened a woman with legal action after she raised concerns about the products and statements made by the firm, an MP has claimed.
Conservative MP Alicia Kearns said Enough, which had also made threats to rape charities, was misleading the public over claims its kits can be used by victims to collect DNA evidence after a rape.
A woman had been told she would face damage to her “personal reputation … career prospects … and future opportunities” if she continued posting about them on social media, Ms Kearns told the Commons.
The woman was also told Enough would pursue her for “injunctive relief, damages for defamation, and recovery of legal costs”, Ms Kearns said.
She added that Enough later instructed a legal firm to issue a “cease and desist” letter.
The MP for Rutland and Stamford said a kit had already caused a rape trial to collapse, and they stopped proper evidence collection or DNA being checked against police records.
Enough describes itself as a “social movement to prevent rape” and advertises its kits as the “breathalyser of rape”.
On its website it says “in principle” Enough’s kits can be admissible in court, but later says that there has not been enough time for a test case.
It also claims the National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC) “have instructed police to use Enough’s evidence where available”.
However, in March the policing body issued a statement which warned against using the kits.
“These kits can create false expectations, lead to re‑traumatisation and reduce trust in statutory services,” the NPCC’s lead for adult sexual offences Chief Constable Sarah Crew said.
A spokesperson for Enough said it “categorically” rejected the allegation that it misleads women.
Ms Kearns spoke about the firm as she called on the Government to ban Strategic Lawsuits against Public Participation, known as Slapps. They are used by individuals and companies to use defamation and privacy laws to intimidate and shut down scrutiny, threatening to tie up their targets in costly legal action.
Justice Secretary David Lammy was a vocal supporter of tougher laws against Slapps while in opposition.
But since coming to power Labour has shied away from introducing standalone legislation to end the practice, so far only activating provisions passed by the previous government to tackle the issue in 2023.
Using parliamentary privilege, Ms Kearns told MPs the case was “stomach-churning” and she hoped Enough would stop threatening those raising concerns.
Ms Kearns said: “The company is called Enough. They sell self-swab rape kits to women and children, and they do so on the back of a series of lies, that their kits are admissible in court. They are not.
“That women are more likely to be raped than get cancer. They are not.
“That 430,000 people are raped in the UK every year. They are not.
“And that only one of their devices will deter a man from raping you, as if it is my responsibility as a woman to stop a man from raping me.”
She said more than 40 sexual assault charities have urged against the kits’ use.
In June last year Rape Crisis said it had “serious concerns about the marketing and selling of the kits”.
MPs on Monday heard that the Advertising Standards Authority, along with Trading Standards is investigating.
Ms Kearns read from a letter which she said had been sent to a woman by Enough.
“She’s not a journalist, she’s not a campaigner, she doesn’t have the protections that I enjoy as a member of Parliament. They thought they could silence her.
“The first letter, signed personally by both founders (Katie) White and Tom Allchurch told her she had seven days to comply or they would pursue “injunctive relief, damages for defamation, and recovery of legal costs”. They accused her of scaremongering.
“Then, and I want the House to hear this clearly, she said to a young woman who dared to raise concerns: ‘Carefully consider the long-term consequences of continuing this campaign. You not only risk serious legal considerations, but also lasting damage to your personal reputation, your career prospects and future opportunities’.
“They threatened destroy her future because she posted questions on Instagram.”
This was met with cries of “shame” from MPs.
Ms Kearns added that a “cease and desist” letter from a law firm was sent a week later.
“This is predatory and is not a one-off,” she said.
She said a legal letter from Enough’s lawyers to a rape crisis charity said the company’s approach was “in the best interests of survivors”.
Ms Kearns continued: “Enough’s targets are rape charities and young children, and they’ve tried to make their lives hell.
“So I urge this Government to ban self-swab rape kits and I urge them to honour their promise to legislate against Slapps.
“I’m speaking out because Enough has intimidated people into silence and rape charities are quiet because they don’t have the financial means to take legal action, legal action which distracts them from their duties to survivors.”
Responding to the debate, Chief Secretary to the Treasury Lucy Rigby said there had been “shocking information about self-swab rape kits” shared.
In a statement, Enough said: “Enough exists to support people who would otherwise do nothing after a sexual assault. The reality is that most survivors never report or access services, leaving many without support or the option of preserving evidence.
“Thousands of young people already support Enough and want a third option to report rape – one that doesn’t force them into a system they feel unable to face.
“We categorically reject any suggestion that we mislead women. Our information is clear about what the kits are, what they are not, and the choices available.
“Enough does not replace SARCs (sexual assault referral centres), the police or specialist support services – it exists alongside them for those not ready or able to access those routes.
“As a non-profit, our focus is giving people options when they feel they have none. That includes being transparent about the legal and evidential landscape, which is why we continue to work with legal experts and stakeholders.
“We do not comment on individual correspondence, but we are committed to engaging responsibly with those who raise concerns.”
