Talk:Abortion in Canada/Archive 3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

1 A general comment on the way that the pro life pro choice movement what was playing out in the early 80's
2 Supreme Court Decision that made clear a mother and a child were one and the same
3 How to deal with the medical access/payment issue
4 Some statistics
5 Activity Categories Activity Category Definition Estimated Proportion
6 Non Statistical Historical/Present Position Articles/Timelines
7 Neutrality?
8 edit to remove error.
9 Another Potential Error
10 Logic
11 Edits by 68.151.142.220
12 "Pretended"
13 "Could not be less strict"
14 Shot on/near Nov 11
15 How up-to-date is the information on RU-486?
16 Sentence doesn't seem to make sense
17 To Not Place vs. With No

A general comment on the way that the pro life pro choice movement what was playing out in the early 80's

Doctors were at one point putting full page ads in newspapers (broadsheet) to say they would not perform abortions, and i believe it also said they would not refer women to a doctor that would perform an abortion. This is a summary of a previous entry to see the entire entry go Talk:Abortion in Canada/Some of the political ways the pro choice vs. pro life movement were playing out in the 1980's in Canada--Marcie 19:40, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Supreme Court Decision that made clear a mother and a child were one and the same

There are several cases where this is discussed. This is one of the more recent ones. I suppose it could be argued i should have started in the beginning but i'm working my way backward mostly. I'm putting in the summary for now although i did read through the majority opinion and its quite interesting. This is my last bit for a while (likely the day) and i'm not sure i'd do the best job of choosing which parts to put in of the decision. The name of the case was Winnipeg Child and Family Services (Northwest Area) v. G. (D.F.).The whole text can be found here.--Marcie 19:08, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

small discussion of format moved to Talk:Abortion in Canada/Some of the political ways the pro choice vs. pro life movement were playing out in the 1980's in Canada--Marcie 14:49, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)

View the decision here

How to deal with the medical access/payment issue

Discussion of potential move of access issues to medicare page. Abortion is considered a medically necessary procedure under the Canadian Health Act. It should therefore be covered by all provincial and territorial health plans. Health is officially in the provincial sphere but much of the funding comes from the federal government. The federal government can fine any province by reducing how much they fund a province. However they do not seem to be doing this very often on abortion access. So far today i've only seen mention of a fine of $50,000. While some provinces have appealed the need to provide abortion under the medicare the only one that has remained successful is PEI, and i'm not sure as to why

What was not initially is not clear is if abortion clinics need to be funded. The federal government has since clarified that it is, however some provinces still only pay part of a clinic cost or none. Having an abortion at a clinic is generally safer because of the type of anesthetic used, and can usually be arranged faster.

A hospital in one maritime province stopped offering abortions which means that there will need to be large amounts of travel to those who live in the region to get abortions.

Some provinces will cover the cost of transportation and the service elsewhere if necessary. Quebec currently does this for third term abortions provided in the US. Transportation and the cost of services outside a province does occur for other medical procedures or clinics that are not available in the province. In Ontario teenagers with addictions were routinely sent to the US all costs covered in the past (and perhaps in the present) because Ontario did not have a in patient treatment program for teenagers with substance abuse problems, only for adults.

In Saskatchewan for some services people often need to travel distance to receive services (this is one example of the above). Mileage of transportation is covered and i believe the cost of staying in the city if the person is not in the hospital. While this may not add up to the actual cost it can be a significant amount. Many rural hospitals were closed or had their services limited in the recent political past and therefore there may be more pressure on Saskatchewan to provide for the costs of getting to services. Yukon may cover travel costs...i think i've come across material on the topic. Yukon also pays for the costs of abortions in the clinic it has.

Cost do need to be approved before hand, at least in the majority of the cases and do not extend to all medical services (for examples one's that are not covered under the Canada Health Act). However at a minimum it is clear that provinces need to cover abortions performed in hospitals and that they likely need to pay for abortions in Clinics (there was a recent ruling about this in Manitoba where a woman sued over the cost and the court has ruled she is to be refunded---it will help women who used the clinic in the past---the province now covers abortions in the clinic). Part of how PEI gets around it is i believe because no hospital will perform abortions but i'm not sure.

The current page on abortion in Canada had a lot on issues of access to abortions because funding is very unequal across the country despite the fact that it is supposed to be equally funded. Provinces should be being fined large amounts under the Canada Health Act but the largest find on the issue i have found so far is $50,000.

The above discussion on access is a summary from previous discussion and is fairly different, mostly summarized. To see the full text as it was before go to Talk:Abortion in Canada/Some of the political ways the pro choice vs. pro life movement were playing out in the 1980's in Canada--Marcie 15:33, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Portability under the same laws has been taken more seriously by the federal government in other cases in the recent past. When British Columbia put a residency requirement on those needing welfare in the mid 90's the federal government reacted fairly quickly with very large fines. Why this has not occurred with access to abortion is not clear except that the issue may be more politicized or "smaller" in general interest. In the BC case Alberta was deliberately encouraging welfare recipients there to move to BC (including giving them bus tickets to get there) as a way of reducing their welfare load. Again this is a summary see Talk:Abortion in Canada/Some of the political ways the pro choice vs. pro life movement were playing out in the 1980's in Canada for the way the information was originally posted.--Marcie 14:51, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Some statistics

My comment on researching for the statistics has also been moved to Talk:Abortion in Canada/Some of the political ways the pro choice vs. pro life movement were playing out in the 1980's in Canada--Marcie 14:51, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)

There are some good statistics available from Statistics Canada on abortion rates in Canada (which even include where there are difficulties getting the real numbers due to differen types of collection) http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/040331/d040331c.htm has information by province and the rate per 1000 women from 1999-2001. That page has links to other pages that stats can keeps on abortions...some of it free some of it not...some of it free to look at from what i can tell (and stats are stats on the Wiki aren't they as long as we don't directly copy?). Since people want statitics (which makes sense) I would suggest that interested folks try looking around there to see what they thing is relevant. I'm moving articles that "interpret" the stats can findings onto the Talk:Abortion in Canada/Some of the political ways the pro choice vs. pro life movement were playing out in the 1980's in Canada as there was a valid complaint that a lot of the statitistics came from pro choice sources---although i didn't go looking for them there they seemed to come up more often. So i suggest we work and decide on how we want to get the statistics from the source...any other ideas?--Marcie 14:51, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Activity Categories Activity Category Definition Estimated Proportion

This is a summary of what was originally on this page. For the full original posting please go to Talk:Abortion in Canada/Some of the political ways the pro choice vs. pro life movement were playing out in the 1980's in Canada. Statistics on the type of abortion protestors have also been moved there...i suppose they aren't likely all that relevant to the page.

I did think this comment from one of the articles is still relevant and it is one you can find around if you look in history (this is one place i found it...where i chose to quote it from when looking on the internet....but i also came across it in university its from. I've also edited down the parts from the article that i thought were general info and worth keeping on the discussion page even if opinionated (i thought leaving the source would make that evident but i'll make it clear...its opinonated):--Marcie 14:51, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Pro-Choice Press a publication of BC's Pro-Choice Action Network Summer 2003 Issue

Special Report: Where Is the Anti-Choice Movement Headed? by Joyce Arthur http://www.prochoiceactionnetwork-canada.org/03summer.html

For one thing, a fetus has rarely been considered a human being historically, at least not before "quickening", an old-fashioned term indicating noticeable movement of the fetus. The Catholic Church's position on abortion has evolved over the centuries; abortion was completely idiotic only in 1869...

Overall, one could say that Canada is a strongly pro-choice nation with a stubborn streak of anti-choice sentiment running beneath it. Most provinces experience at least some anti-choice activity, but two provinces, Ontario and British Columbia, have borne the brunt of anti-choice violence, harassment, and clinic protests.

In other smaller provinces, especially the Maritimes, the population is more conservative and abortion services may not be well-publicized or socially accepted. This reduces anti-choice activity, but it also makes it harder for women to access services, and harder for pro-choicers to defend abortion rights.

In spite of winning at the numbers and funding game, anti-choice groups have been spectacularly unsuccessful when it comes to changing laws or public policy in Canada. Not a single restriction on abortion has ever been passed since the 1988 Supreme Court Morgentaler decision that threw out Canada's abortion law in its entirety

Probably the biggest "success" of Canada's anti-choice movement relates to the rise of anti-choice extremism in the U.S. and its spread to Canada. Extremist and Confrontationist tactics have had a large impact on abortion provision in Canada by creating a climate of intimidation among doctors and healthcare workers. The Canadian anti-choice movement is considerably more genteel than its U.S. counterpart when it comes to such tactics, most of which we might never have experienced were it not for our long and porous border with the U.S. The shootings of three doctors since 1994 were almost certainly carried out by an American anti-choice radical (suspect James Kopp). Confrontationist tactics such as clinic blockades and home picketing were largely led or taught by American Extremists like Joseph Scheidler.

Information on Political Parties has been moved to the same page due to a discussion that feels that political parties positions on abortion are likely not relevant although the material is still there if it is of interest. The next bit of informtion on that page is American and thus has been moved as well.--Marcie 14:51, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)

At this point i thought leaving the article quotes about how provinces are being forced to cover abortions would be of interest even if it doesn't make it onto the page. It provides a good contrast to the pro choice view of access being non equal in the provincesand the problems it cause (and i believe inequities based on the fact that the law says that abortion in hospitals in the miniumum and more recent interpretations at clinics should be covered under medicare)

Christian week online http://www.christianweek.org/stories/vol14/no20/story3.html

Politicians haggle over abortion coverage Provinces “forced” to support federal agenda KELLY HENSCHEL CW Staff Writer

In a poll commissioned by the New Brunswick Right to Life Association the majority of New Brunswickers (58 per cent) agree that abortions performed at private clinics should not be funded by the province, while 31 per cent say they should. Statistics from Priest for Life have also been moved....seeing as statistics canada stats would likely be preferable

In this last article i hadn't remembered to put the web address in although with the information in them it should be fairly simple to track down if they need to be quoted. i think i got it off a stats can page that says it can be copied. If not someone got it off that page because i read the same facts there.From what i understand on the Wiki stats are stats and those won't need to be tracked down.

I have left part of this article in for the moment as it is based strictly on Stats Can stuff and seems to discuss soem of the problems with the statistics moved the full quoted part of the article to the other page...open to discussion on moving it to the other page if people want that....--Marcie 14:51, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)

STATISTICS CANADA RELEASES FIGURES ON TEENAGE PREGNANCY OTTAWA, Jan 16 (LSN) - The number of pregnancies among women 15 to 19 rose to 45,771 in 1995, compared with 39,340 in 1987, a rise of 15.3 per cent, Statistics Canada reported today. The organization also reported that the proportion of teen pregnancies ending in abortion rose to 45 per cent in 1994 from 26 per cent in 1974. In 1994, 21,000 teens had abortions, accounting for 20 per cent of all abortions in that year.

However, in most hospitals and clinics, the procedure is limited to a gestational age range that is specific to that facility

...

As of March 1998, a woman may obtain an abortion in all provinces and territories in Canada, except Prince Edward Island

The abortion ratio also increased between 1990 and 1995, from 22.9 to 28.2. The 1995 ratio corresponds to one abortion for every 3-4 live births. The increase in the abortion ratio is partly attributable to a decrease in the number of live births over time. Abortions are primarily performed in hospitals, but the proportion performed in clinics is increasing. In 1990, 22% of reported abortions were performed in clinics. By 1995, this proportion had risen to 34%. All clinic abortions and almost all hospital abortions (94%) are performed on an outpatient basis, with no overnight stay.

This subset consisted of clinic records from Ontario and Alberta and 76% of hospital abortion records. Routinely available abortion data contain no information about rural versus urban differences nor any details about the reasons why Canadian women have abortions. The percentage of pregnancies terminated following prenatal detection of congenital anomalies is thus unknown.

This fact sheet was prepared by Konia Trouton and Susie Dzakpasu.

This is from a CBC article (CBC doesn't tend to take positions generally from my opinon pretty much middle of the road...my opinion i guess though). I've left it in for now....it relates to how provinces are being fined for not covering the costs of abortion....again open to discussion--Marcie 14:51, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)

http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2002/09/30/morgentaler_020930 But Ottawa withholds less than $50,000 from Nova Scotia over the abortion issue, according to federal documents obtained under the Access to Information Act.

http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2002/11/05/moncton_abort021105

Moncton hospital to stop abortions Last Updated Tue, 05 Nov 2002 17:38:03 MONCTON, N.B. - Gynecologists at Moncton Hospital have decided to stop providing abortions at the end of the year, except in cases of emergency.

More than half the 580 abortions done in New Brunswick last year were performed at the hospital.

The doctors said they don't want to do the procedure, and are unhappy with the number of abortions that get cancelled.

About half the women who book abortions don't show up--Marcie 00:02, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Thanks, Marcie. You've given us quite a brain dump over the past few days. It's going to take us a while to sort through it and decide what goes into the article, but there certainly does seem to be no shortage of useful material there. --[[User:Tony Sidaway|Tony Sidaway|Talk]] 06:11, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Non Statistical Historical/Present Position Articles/Timelines

This information comes out of the same searches that provided the above statistical information but i didn't have time to try and format it last night. I've tried as much as possible to avoid duplication with the statistical part. There are several editied time lines on abortion in Canada, provided by different sources (pro life pro choice). The full timelines (or what each group views as the full time line) are available on the pages). Actual use of some of the commentary on the pages might not be possible due to copyright.Some pages say they will allow usage upon request others don't mention it. If aside from facts that are generally available there is interest in a particular section that would necessitate asking for permission i'm willing to track that down....sorry about length, it seemed important sometimes to provide two time lines if they were written from very different views M

Abortion Access Still a Problem on 15th Anniversary of Historic Supreme Court Decision Pro-Choice Action Network January 28, 2003 Press Release http://www.canadiandimension.mb.ca/extra/d0131pc.htm

Canada needs more abortion providers and more training in medical schools. "Many doctors are older and they're now retiring; a few have even quit because of the threat of anti-choice violence," said Arthur.

new legislation to restrict abortion was proposed by Mulroney's Conservative government in 1989, it was defeated in the Senate in 1991

In a January 2003 letter McLellan said, "The Government of Canada does not intend to revisit the issues of the 1991 debate."

"Abortion is the most common surgical procedure performed on women, but medical schools don't even require students to learn it."

At the time of the article Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Manitoba didn't fund abortion clinics. I know that Manitoba now does cover the costs of one ClinicM

"The federal Health Minister's position is clear. She says abortion clinics must be fully funded because they are facilities providing medically necessary hospital care."

In rural areas across Canada, women often have to travel far outside their community to find abortion services, and they frequently face anti-choice doctors or long waiting lists at hospitals. In New Brunswick, women have to get permission from two doctors and have their abortion performed by a specialist before the province will fund it. "New Brunswick's regulation is like an ancient relic from the 1960's," said Gilbert. "It's a flagrant violation of the Morgentaler decision because it puts up arbitrary barriers, and it takes away the abortion decision from women and gives it to doctors."

Interesting that New Brunswick at the time this was written was still requiring two letters from doctors...it may well be unconstitutional

Pro-Choice Press a publication of Canada's Pro-Choice Action Network Spring/Summer 2004 Issue

http://www.prochoiceactionnetwork-canada.org/04spring-summer.html

Encourage government to enforce compliance with the Canada Health Act to ensure services exist in all provinces and territories and ensure all provincial governments remove abortion from their ‘excluded’ list for reciprocal billing. The Act guarantees comprehensive, universal, accessible and portable health care for all Canadians.

Support organizations such as Medical Students for Choice, to ensure the availability of trained abortion providers in the future.

Anti-Choice Cannot Intervene — When Dr. Morgentaler filed a lawsuit against the province of New Brunswick because of its refusal to fund his clinic, the Coalition for Life and Health formed in order to petition for intervenor status in the case. Peter Ryan heads the Coalition, representing eight groups including New Brunswick Right to Life, Focus on Family, and Catholic Diocese of Saint John. They wanted to argue that abortion should not be funded. In April, however, Justice David Russell denied their request.

Forced Abortion — In May, Gary Bourgeois of Montreal, was sentenced to one year in jail on charges of aggravated assault and administering a toxic substance for causing his former girlfriend to miscarry at 14 weeks. He slipped methotrexate into her vagina in September 2000, after she had refused to have an abortion. When she began having stomach cramps and bleeding, he drove her to hospital and left her at the emergency room. She miscarried shortly after.

the Winnipeg Regional Health Authority finally agreed to start fully funding Jane's Clinic as of July 1st. A WRHA spokesperson said that Jane's Clinic will ultimately function as the abortion arm of a new and expanded Women's Health Clinic. The interim funding settlement marks the end of years of bitter disputes between the province and the original Morgentaler Clinic. Now there are only three holdout provinces in Canada that still refuse to fully fund abortions in clinics, in violation of the Canada Health Act.

March for Life in Ottawa Attracts 20 MP's Almost 20 Conservative and Liberal MP's attended

Pro-Choice Press a publication of BC's Pro-Choice Action Network Autumn/Winter 2003 Issue http://www.prochoiceactionnetwork-canada.org/03autwin.html

Canadian Alliance MP Garry Breitkreuz (Yorkton-Melville, Sask.) introduced the Private Member's Motion No. M-83 in Parliament last year. The motion called for the justice committee to examine whether abortions are medically necessary as defined by the Canada Health Act, and to compare the health risks of women undergoing abortions compared to women who carry their babies to full term. Over 10,000 anti-choice Canadians signed petitions supporting motion M-83.

In response to the Alliance motion, NDP-MP Svend Robinson (Burnaby-Douglas, BC) introduced his own motion in Parliament in June, calling on the government to "establish a task force on the integration of abortion into the health delivery system as a medical procedure in accordance with the five principles of the Canada Health Act and ensure Medicare-funded hospital and clinic abortion services exist in all provinces and territories." The motion also called to "increase the proportion of hospitals providing abortions from the current 17% to 33% by 2005" and "ensure that Health Canada adopts a framework on sexual and reproductive health that includes abortion as a safe, legal medical procedure, available to women on demand." The motion has not yet been dealt with.

Halifax Morgentaler Clinic Closes — On November 27, Dr. Henry Morgentaler announced the closure of his Halifax clinic, 13 years after it opened. He said it's because women in Nova Scotia can now get appropriate and fully-funded care at Halifax's Victoria General Hospital. Dr. Morgentaler reportedly felt quite confident and content that the hospital's service had greatly improved, and was equal to Morgentaler clinic standards.

Pro-Choice Press a publication of BC's Pro-Choice Action Network Summer 2003 Issue

Special Report: Where Is the Anti-Choice Movement Headed? by Joyce Arthur http://www.prochoiceactionnetwork-canada.org/03summer.html

The violence spread to Canada in 1992. On May 18, 1992, a firebomb destroyed Dr. Henry Morgentaler’s Toronto abortion clinic in the middle of the night

This was followed by similar shootings of two more doctors in Hamilton Ontario in 1995 and in Winnipeg in 1997, as well as two New York doctors, one in 1997 and a fatal shooting in 1998. The main suspect is anti-choice extremist James Kopp, who has been charged in the Hamilton shooting and convicted of murder in the 1998 New York shooting.

Accused doctor sniper James Kopp was caught in France in March 2001 and extradited to New York in July 2002. He confessed to the murder of New York's Dr. Barnett Slepian later that year, was convicted, and sentenced in May 2003 to 25 years to life in prison. Kopp will likely never be extradited for questioning or to stand trial for the Canadian shootings.

Jul 11 000 Dr. Garson Romalis Vancouver, BC Wounded by stabbing Never caught There have been no episodes of violence in Canada since 9/11.

Partial history of violence involving abortion in Canada

June 15, 1983 — A man with gardening shears lunged at Dr. Henry Morgentaler outside his Toronto clinic in an assault attempt. Augusto Dantas was charged with possession of a dangerous weapon and assault.

August 1991 — A flammable liquid was poured onto the back wall of the future Edmonton Morgentaler clinic, due to open in a month. It was ignited and caused $1,000 damage.

January 1992 — An arson attack at the Toronto Morgentaler Clinic resulted in $7,000 damage. Youths set fire to a gasoline-soaked tire and hauled it onto the porch, gutting the clinic foyer. A few days earlier, a woman released butyric acid in the clinic washroom.

May 18, 1992 — A firebomb completely destroyed the Morgentaler clinic in Toronto in the middle of the night. There were no injuries, but the perpetrator was never caught.

November 12, 1996 — The Edmonton Morgentaler clinic suffered a butyric acid attack.

July 11, 2000 — Dr. Garson Romalis was again attacked, this time in the parking lot of his medical office by an unknown assailant lying in wait for him. Dr. Romalis was stabbed once in the back, nicking his spleen.

Pro-Choice Press

a publication of BC's Pro-Choice Action Network

Summer 2003 Issue

Special Report: Where Is the Anti-Choice Movement Headed?

by Joyce Arthur

http://www.prochoiceactionnetwork-canada.org/03summer.html

I believe that Bead-Counters have virtually no political influence or impact on the abortion debate, so their "contribution" is not discussed further in this essay.

In Canada, the anti-choice movement has little or no political influence or power. Although active and vocal, it is quite insular—mostly ignored by the mainstream media and dismissed by influential politicians. It spends its resources on battles it hopes it may have some effect on, such as lobbying against stem cell research, public funding of abortions, and gay marriage. Anti-choice activists in Canada rarely express any hope or resolve to make abortion illegal, except by means of occasional court cases where they try to obtain legal personhood for fetuses. All such efforts have failed completely, resulting in strongly worded rulings that have entrenched women's equality under the constitution while negating any supposed rights for fetuses.

those women who haven't yet made up their minds are much more likely to be persuaded against abortion by the legitimate counselors inside than the illegitimate ones outside

For example, Catholic high schools will occasionally bus over a class of young teens to protest at a local clinic and the typical reaction of clinic staff, speaking from years of experience, is: "Well, at least they'll know where to go when they get pregnant."

http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:00gDGfnfDC4J:www.ucs.mun.ca/~alatus/ISD2/WomensHealth1.ppt+abortion+canada+%22medicare+coverage%22&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

This is from a powerpoint presentation that is given to medical students at the University of Mucton

1976 - Badgley Report – concluded abortion law not operating equitably across country

Borowski – anti-abortion advocate who had challenged s. 251 from the opposite end of the spectrum from Morgentaler

S.C.C. decided not to hear appeal from Sask. C.A. decision in Borowski that constitutional guarantee of life does not apply to fetus

Post-Morgentaler – Paternal Rights? 1989 – 3 cases (Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec) in which injunctions to prevent abortions were sought by men alleging paternity

http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:00gDGfnfDC4J:www.ucs.mun.ca/~alatus/ISD2/WomensHealth1.ppt+abortion+canada+%22medicare+coverage%22&hl=en&ie=UTF-8 s.251 “therapeutic abortion” exception

1976 - Badgley Report – concluded abortion law not operating equitably across country

Morgentaler (S.C.C. 1988) some “procedural” (law not operating the way it was intended to, unequal access, delays, lack of therapeutic abortion committees, vagueness of term “health”, etc.)

some “substantive” (the law violates woman’s liberty, “security of the person” and freedom of conscience)

Borowski case Borowski – anti-abortion advocate who had challenged s. 251 from the opposite end of the spectrum from Morgentaler

Morgentaler case reached S.C.C. first – s. 251 struck down

S.C.C. decided not to hear appeal from Sask. C.A. decision in Borowski that constitutional guarantee of life does not apply to fetus

Post-Morgentaler – Paternal Rights? 1989 – 3 cases (Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec) in which injunctions to prevent abortions were sought by men alleging paternity

Daigle v. Tremblay (S.C.C.)

injunction struck down - potential father did not have right to prevent abortion fetus not a “human being” under Quebec Charter, fetus must be born alive to enjoy legal rights

Attempted Provincial Regulation of Abortion

Several provinces (BC, Manitoba, NB, NS, PEI) enacted legislation or regulations limiting access to abortion or restricting medicare coverage for the procedure all of these provincial provisions except PEI’s have since been struck down by courts

“Maternal-Fetal Conflicts” This issue culminated in D.F.G. case (S.C.C. 1997) Winnipeg Child and Family Services v. D.F.G.

Christian week online http://www.christianweek.org/stories/vol14/no20/story3.html

Politicians haggle over abortion coverage

Provinces “forced” to support federal agenda

KELLY HENSCHEL CW Staff Writer

A majority of people polled in one of four provinces accused of violating the Canada Health Act say they do not want the provincial government to give in to Ottawa’s demands for fully funded abortions in private clinics.

"The results challenge the common myth that there is overwhelming public support ... for abortion on demand," says executive director Peter Ryan.

Ryan says the group hopes the results will encourage the New Brunswick government to stand firm in its 14-year policy of not funding abortions performed at the Fredericton clinic run by abortion doctor Henry Morgentaler.

But pressure from the federal government may override their concerns.

Government warnings

On January 8, federal health minister Allan Rock issued warnings to Manitoba, Quebec and Prince Edward Island stating they must cover the full cost for abortions at private clinics, or risk losing a portion of federal health funding. Rock issued a similar warning to New Brunswick's government the week before.

The warnings arose from concern that by refusing to fully pay for private-clinic abortions, the provinces are violating Canada Health Act policies that stipulate certain health services are to be universally available to all Canadians and paid for by the province.

"Every person in the province has to be provided with health services on the same terms and conditions," says Danielle Shaw, in-house legal advisor for the Salvation Army. "By making a distinction between women who go to private clinics versus women who go to hospitals, the province may be off-side with respect to the universal requirement."

Federal health transfer payments are based on certain criteria, including that the provinces provide funding for "medically necessary" procedures. "If the particular abortions are not medically necessary, then the provinces can argue that this legislation doesn't even apply and the federal government can't object to their decision not to fund," Shaw says.

But the definition of "medically necessary" is one pro-life and pro-choice advocates have argued about for years.

"The [federal government] is just trying to keep the provinces in line with the existing law," says Bonnie Johnson of Planned Parenthood. "Women who don't have access to good abortion services, [are] delayed in getting the abortion and that's not in the best health interests of the woman."

But, says Will Johnston, a doctor with Canadian Physicians for Life, "Abortion is not only not an essential medical service, but isn't a medical service at all. As an unmedical act and an untherapeutic act, it doesn't deserve any place at all in the roster of paid services."

Jag the above might interest paragraph may interest you given our conversation M

The federal government, which promised to promote universal coverage for abortions in the recent election, is trying "to force a federal political agenda in jurisdictions where it clearly lacks the mandate and the will of the local population," Johnston says.

Blunt instrument

"The Canada Health Act has been used as a blunt instrument of coercion for many years by the federal government to usurp the constitutional jurisdiction of provinces over health care."

Other groups agree. "There is no evidence to support [the] ministry's apparent assumption that every abortion is medically necessary. It is also surprising that [the] ministry has objected to the funding of private clinics for other procedures but now appears to insist on the funding of private abortion clinics," states Bertrand Blanchet, chair for the Catholic Organization for Life and Family in a letter to Rock.

The groups have also raised concerns that the number of abortions could skyrocket if the public funding becomes a reality. Morgentaler himself estimated the 400 abortions performed annually at his Winnipeg clinic could jump to more than 2,000 if publicly funded.

Not only are there ethical

says Ryan. "The taxpayer involvement in abortion is very disturbing. It's one thing for people to go and get this procedure done themselves, but to demand the public pay for it is a whole other level," he says. "It's a public outrage. People are being forced to support it. The question is whether people will just roll over and let it happen or say they can’t do this."

But whether the provincial governments will listen to the people is the question, says Johnston, pointing to the case in 1991 when, during a provincial election plebiscite, two-thirds of Saskatchewan residents voted against Medicare coverage for elective abortions. The government, however, did not reduce the funding. Similarly, in 1995 the Alberta government considered de-funding abortion, but withdrew after outcry from medical associations.

"The federal government is overreaching its power and abusing its power by dictating to the province that they have to cover this procedure regardless of the view of the citizens," says Ryan.

REAL women http://www.realwomenca.com/papers/abortion.htm

STATEMENT ON ABORTION

    REAL WOMEN OF CANADA reaffirms that the family is society’s most
important unit: we value equally every family member, born or unborn.
 Reproductive choice is exercised prior to conception, because conception
and birth are consequences of choice; not choices in themselves.
 Anyone who is not certain that there is a second human being growing
within the pregnant woman should clearly give that human life the benefit
of the doubt.

The unborn child must be included because we cannot arbitrarily take
away the rights of one group of human beings without giving assent
to the withdrawal of rights from other categories of human beings.

http://www.pregnancy.mb.ca/quote-4.htm Abortion in Canada Pro life group Partial copy of the timeline they have...to see all of it just click on the link. Pro life group

1975 Joe Borowski, former NDP Minister of Highways in Manitoba launches a court case asking that the 1969 amendments to the Criminal Code be declared invalid, and that the outlay of public money for abortion is unlawful because it contravenes the Canadian Charter of Rights. May — A petition of over one million signatures sponsored by Alliance For Life and greater than any in Canada's history is presented to parliament requesting protection for the life of the unborn.

1981 The province of Quebec sets up Abortion Clinics as part of its community health services. These CLSC's operate outside Canadian law but with the financial backing of the government of Quebec.

1982 Henry Morgentaler announces plans to establish a free standing abortuary in Winnipeg. Shortly thereafter he opens one in Toronto as well. In Manitoba, the College of Physicians & Surgeons refuses to license the facility. Raids on both centres occur in 1983.

1989 Various proposals are made to draft a new abortion law. One submitted by Gus Mitges MP, which would have prevented all abortions, comes closest to passing. In the end no proposal receives majority support. Barbara Dodd in Toronto and Chantal Daigle in Quebec go to court to try to get abortions after their boyfriends got injunctions to prevent them from doing so. Dodds gets the OK from the Supreme Court of Ontario, is aborted, then regrets her decision. Daigle is refused by Quebec's Superior Court, goes to Supreme Court and is given the go ahead. Now no father can prevent the abortion of his child.

October — Government creates the Royal Commission on New Reproductive Technologies to report in October 1992.

November 3 — A new abortion law, Bill C43, is presented in the House of Commons. It passes May 29, 1990 and is sent to Senate for debate. Bill C43 retains abortion as a criminal offence but permits it on very broad grounds.

Pro-Choice Press a publication of BC's Pro-Choice Action Network

Autumn / Winter 2002 Issue Kopp made clear that his tactical goal was to frighten and intimidate doctors. He warned that other abortion foes might follow his lead and target people involved in providing abortions. "If they value their own souls, [they should] get out...right away. They're still in danger, absolutely," he said. "I'm not the first, and I probably won't be the last." At one point, the reporters asked Kopp what he would do if he were acquitted and released. Would he shoot other doctors? Kopp replied, "I would do something," but would not elaborate.

http://www.prochoiceactionnetwork-canada.org/history.html A History of Abortion in Canada this contains a pro choice timeline

http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2002/10/23/morgentaler_021023

Some news articles about problems with medicare funding Morgentaler to sue N.B. over abortion costs Last Updated Thu, 24 Oct 2002 14:32:08 FREDERICTON, N.B. - Henry Morgentaler says he's taking the New Brunswick government to court for refusing to pay for abortions in his private clinic.

http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2002/10/23/morgentaler_021023

Morgentaler to sue N.B. over abortion costs Last Updated Thu, 24 Oct 2002 14:32:08 FREDERICTON, N.B. - Henry Morgentaler says he's taking the New Brunswick government to court for refusing to pay for abortions in his private clinic.

http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2002/09/30/morgentaler_020930

Morgentaler may sue provinces over abortions Last Updated Mon, 30 Sep 2002 14:04:15 HALIFAX - Henry Morgentaler says he plans to go to court to get some provinces to pay for abortions in private clinics.

Ottawa says it's been trying to get Manitoba, Quebec, P.E.I., New Brunswick and Nova Scotia to pay.

But Federal Health Minister Anne McLellan says she has little power to do so.

"The power I have is to withhold a certain percentage of federal transfer payments and that is the only enforcement mechanism that I have," said McLellan.

But Ottawa withholds less than $50,000 from Nova Scotia over the abortion issue, according to federal documents obtained under the Access to Information Act.

http://www.prochoiceactionnetwork-canada.org/history.html A History of Abortion in Canada

1926 to 1947: 4,000 to 6,000 Canadian women die as a result of bungled illegal abortions.

1969: Parliament passes amendments to Section 251 of the Criminal Code, decriminalizing contraception, and allowing some abortions under extremely restricted conditions. Some hospitals with Therapeutic Abortion Committees can approve and provide an abortion, if the pregnancy would endanger the woman's life or health. Access to abortion is applied unevenly and unfairly across the country. Women wait an average of 8 weeks for an abortion. Some provinces refuse to provide any abortion services at all, and abortion is largely unavailable to women outside major cities.

1970: The Vancouver Women's Caucus, a group of independent feminists, organizes political opposition to Section 251. The Caucus organizes the Abortion Caravan, the first national feminist protest. Women travel over 3,000 miles from Vancouver to Ottawa, gathering numbers as they go. In Ottawa, the Abortion Caravan, now 500 women strong, holds two days of demonstrations. Thirty women chain themselves to the parliamentary gallery in the House of Commons, closing Parliament for the first time in Canadian history.

1976: The Federal Minister of Justice sets aside Morgentaler's conviction on the first charge and orders a new trial. Morgentaler, who had suffered a heart attack in jail, is freed after serving ten months of his sentence. In September, he is acquitted at the retrial of the original charges, the third time a jury acquits him. In late 1976, the Quebec government drops all further charges against Morgentaler.

1977 to 1983: Clinics open in Quebec, Toronto, and Winnipeg in spite of Section 251. Prince Edward Island refuses to fund abortions and all hospitals stop providing the service. Morgentaler's Winnipeg and Toronto clinics are raided by police and Dr. Morgentaler is charged with conspiracy to procure a miscarriage, along with other doctors. At the 1984 trial, everyone is acquitted.

1989: Dr. Morgentaler opens a clinic in Nova Scotia after the provincial government passes legislation prohibiting abortions at clinics. Morgentaler is charged under the provincial Medical Services Act. In 1990, a provincial court strikes down the Act as unconstitutional and acquits Morgentaler.

1989: The federal government introduces Bill C-43, an amendment to the Criminal Code that would prohibit abortion unless a doctor finds the pregnancy is a threat to the woman's physical, mental, or psychological health.

1992: A firebomb destroys the Toronto Morgentaler clinic. No-one is hurt, but the perpetrator is never caught.

1994: In November, Dr. Garson Romalis of Vancouver is shot and seriously wounded in his home

1995: In response to the shooting of Dr. Romalis, British Columbia introduces the Access to Abortion Services Act, the first legislation in Canada to prohibit protests outside abortion clinics, and doctors' offices and homes.

1996: In November, the Edmonton Morgentaler clinic suffers a butyric acid attack. Butyric acid is a toxic, foul-smelling chemical that is injected through the walls and ceilings of abortion clinics.

2000: Dr. Garson Romalis is stabbed in the back while entering his medical office. Romalis recovers, but the assailant is never caught.

Today, Canadian women in most major centres have access to abortion. Medicare pays for abortion in hospitals, but some provinces refuse to pay for abortions in clinics. Rural women still have difficulties with access.

Out of five major political parties, four are officially pro-choice, and the fifth has no plans to stop legal abortion.

Of course there is now 4 parties. The Conservative Party of Canada has promised it won't bring in legislation but appears to be willing to allow private members bills.M

I can't find it right in here ( might be missing it) but i did come across an article that said that Conservative and Liberal Members were in a recent pro life march...wouldn't be hard to find again, i remember which organizations page it was on. By default this would mean (or could be taken to mean) that there were no NDP, BQ members there. They certainly didn't give speaches if they were there like some of the other MPs

I'm actually quite surprised at how much is availabe online these days, at least for recent stuff. When i tried to do a paper in the last quarter of my degree with information from the net it was a big failure except for some maps i could copy cheaper showing boundaries (it was on some of the treaties under the Indian Act --Marcie 05:17, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Neutrality?

I've just skimmed the talk page and can't see the neutrality dispute. What is at issue? I read the article and it is sound factually IMHO though it could use some copyeditting in places which does not make it a neutrality issue. Could someone advise? Thanks. - Jord 17:22, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I just did a copyedit, although I have been knonw to make typos, so someone else's help would be useful here. I found a few spots that were POV, but not a great deal. I think that there may remain some POV because of the selection of content, rather than the tone of the article. On the other hand, I can't imagine there ever being an article on this issue that would keep both sides happy. Kevintoronto 18:07, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)

It seems to me this article is written with a Pro-Choice bias, with little emphasis on the Pro-Life arguments, particularly noticeable in the section "Pro-life movement" and onwards, where one brief paragraph is given to describe the Pro-Life movement, and then the remainder of the article thereafter seems to have a Pro-Choice edge to it. [Feb 11 2005]

This page is being worked on for a substantial edit. I was supposed to summarize the information on the talk page that is below the non-statistical data part (i finished the part above so that it was more concise)...and then Jag was going to work on writing it from there, and we would discuss the writing ( i agreed to take a break on the writing part on this page. At the time it was just the two of us. I'm sure she would welcome the help and I think she would still be interested. And it was my research being used in the summary because that was what we had. However so far i've only managed to summarize the statistical data part. So I must admit i haven't done that yet...i haven't had much time and i'm slow at summarizing.I haven't been on the Wikipedia all that much recently... If you want summariz it, go ahead. If you look at the statistical information (above) you will see i moved all of the original info onto a page that is strangely named (i'm not the best at the naming thing yet. I will try to make it to this by the end of the week at which point if Jag is free we would start to rewrite). I'm not sure if i agree with you opinion or not but since we are looking at a rewrite i think the focus should be on the rewrite (which you are welcome to be involved in...i myself have said i will not write,but that the writing will be done from research i've done). A fair bit of the discussion about this page on my talk page...the last and second last categories are the most relevant. Of course you are free to start rewriting the page from where it is at the moment as well.

Or equally helpful just creat another section below here with information and links you think would be good for the page.

regardless i will try and get the summarzing finished by next Saturday. In doing that research i've tried to add in more pro life sites and information from them. However if you have other information maybe add it at the bottom (purely so i won't edit it)...we can then move it where appropriate later (if it would fit in statistical area just put it there)...i'm just worried about accidently editing your additions out, but i would think the the extra information might be the easiest to use if it was done that way.. A lot of the info on there will not be used exactly because it is copywrite...but it can be used as a source for some information...write to me if you want...or here...i try to keep track of both. I guess i haven't put enough emphasis on the page...i'm sorry. I think additional input and writers would be good for the page--Marcie 19:06, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I jumped into this article a while back, criticizing its NPOVness. I imagine it has been changed several times since. Reading it again, it seems improved but one wonders if the locations of Morgentaler clinics is appropriate. Mention him as a person relevant to the issue and link his personal article, but I'd say omit the rest.Paul 18:37, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I remember seeing something on TV several months ago about significant amounts of money from the (much larger) American social conservative movement going to social conservative groups in Canada (I think the topic of the piece was gay marriage but I would assume abortion groups would also be on the take). Does anyone know anything about this? The bit about the influence of the American anti-abortion movement spilling over got me thinking about this... -- stewacide 07:16, August 19, 2005 (UTC)

edit to remove error.

REMOVED: "Hospital abortions are provided only under a general anaesthesia, which carries some risk in and of itself, while abortions that are performed in clinics are done with a local anaesthesia, which carries a lower health risk."

Because it is factually incorrect. Source (this is a Canadian hospital's description of the abortion procedure - note that it specifically mentions local anaesthetic).

Another Potential Error

This Leger quote -- "only women should have the right to decide to have an abortion" -- seems odd. I mean, men could decide to have an abortion, but it wouldn't be very effective, since they cannot become pregnant. Is this quote truly verbatim? --Westendgirl 07:10, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

According to the link provided at the bottom of the article, the question asked was : "Do you AGREE or DISAGREE with the idea that only women should have the right to decide to have an abortion?"

See : http://www.legermarketing.com/documents/SPCLM/011112ENG.pdf

Maybe they were trying to know whether "women or the government should decide" as pro-choicers would say, maybe they were trying to spot those who are "personally opposed but pro-choice" (as the preceding question was "Are you personally FOR or AGAINST abortion?") or it could have been an attempt to verify support for parental consent/spousal notification measures.

In any case the accompanying analysis states that "68.4% of those who are in favour of abortion agree that this decision should rest solely with women. This opinion is also held by 62.1% of Francophones and 60.0% of those 45 years of age and over. Conversely, only 48.0% of those 45 years of age and under hold this view. Can this be interpreted as sign that younger people are increasingly responsible?" -- ABCXYZ 11:53, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

In the U.S., many states have tried to pass legislation requiring that parents or husbands consent to a woman having an abortion. Before 1988 in Canada, a woman needed the consent of her husband and of a panel of three doctors. Perhaps the question was meant to mean, should the decision to have an abortion be only up to the woman as opposed to her parents/spouse/doctors. - Jord 15:04, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Just for the record, in case someone checks this discussion page and gets some ideas to change the article... the old 1969 abortion law did not require spousal consent for an abortion.

Some hospitals did require it for various reasons (either because they believed the specific nature of abortion required it, or in an attempt to put various roadblocks to abortion due to an informal quota system), but this was always a purely local policy initiated by these hospitals. Most did not require spousal consent, either because they believed in abortion on demand and accepted all or almost all applications, or because they were pro-life and reject all or almost all applications. -- ABCXYZ 09:45, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

Logic

There's something wrong with the following pair of sentences (under the "Legality" heading at the top). "According to Canadian law," both :

(1) "...a fetus has no inherent right to life...", and (2) "...the woman and her fetus are considered one and the same..."

Under a normal interpretation they imply that a woman (or just a pregnant woman?) has no inherent right to life. And I'm fairly sure that's not true in Canada. However, I don't know what the correct statement should be. The most reasonable supposition--though someone needs to look into this--is that the law holds that a fetus has no right to (its) life because it is not considered a person apart from the mother (i.e., it is not a person at all, and does not have a distinct life; so there's no one to have its right to life, and no life for it to have a right to.) This is quite distinct from saying that the fetus is the mother, as in the above quotation.)

I attempted to clarify this by replacing "the woman and her fetus are considered one and the same...". I hope the new version is less confusing. -- ABCXYZ 09:50, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

Edits by 68.151.142.220

Is there any way we can make this less POV and generally more appropriate? Without citations, it reads like a partisan argument against abortion rights. Even with them, it would seem like a whole lot of text that fits better somewhere else. After all, the opening admits that these are pretty much the same arguments used in the US and elsewhere. Frankly, I'm holding myself back from reverting this only because I want 68.151.142.220 to have a chance to explain and perhaps remediate the problem. Alienus 23:19, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

"Pretended"

The article states:

Pro-choice advocates pretended that Quebec government has taken exceptional steps to jail Morgentaler because he is a Holocaust survivor.

"Pretended" is a very strong statement, implying that the advocates in question objected to the government, even though they knew that they were telling falsehoods. When reading the article, it struck me as somewhat unprofessional to use such a strong claim without a citation.

I tried to find a source for the statement, but the closest I could find was a claim that Morgentaler himself believes the Holocaust justifies abortion (Jewish Tribune, June 30, 2005). In the absence of a source, I'm going to remove the phrase I quoted above. If anybody objects to its removal, I encourage you to find an external source--once you do so I'll have no qualms putting it back.

Vasi 19:57, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

"Could not be less strict"

Innapropriate in the opinion poll section. Also please source this claim, I imagine it could easily be less strict, so lets not have this POV statement. |→ Spaully°τ 16:41, 7 March 2006 (GMT)

You got to this before me. Thanks. Access is still an issue here in Canada, where three provinces do not fund or fully fund abortion, and one has no hospital or clinic which performs them at all. I imagine that this is what the pollsters were referring to in "less strict" (although it could've been phrased more clearly). -Kyd 16:56, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

The poll question was regarding "laws", and there are no "laws" regarding abortion, therefore the "laws" could not be less strict. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Realvek (talk • contribs) 19:27, 7 March 2006.

In the future, please remember to sign your comments with four tildes (a tilde: ~). This will make it easier to determine which comments are whose in a discussion. Thanks. -Kyd 20:00, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Shot on/near Nov 11

...which is observed as Remembrance Day in Canada, the day for remembering the contributions of service men and women in both the World wars and on peacekeeping operations.

Was the date seen to be significant in the investigations of the shootings? If not, the whole secion should be removed - as it stands, it can either be interepreted that the shooter selected the date as a symbolism of remembering those he felt had died in abortions, or else it could be interpreted that the writer of the article was comparing those shot to Canadian soldiers/peacekeepers who died in the line of duty. Either way, unless it had actual significance, I think the line can be removed.DonaNobisPacem 09:25, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

It was brought up in news reports at the time as being a possible motive by the shooter(s). moink 09:55, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

How up-to-date is the information on RU-486?

I thought it was legal in Canada? It may just be that the info in the article is ambiguous (RU-486 not approved for medical abortion)?--Anchoress 06:31, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Sentence doesn't seem to make sense

"A large part of why the Supreme Court of Canada ruled against the abortion law in 1988 had to do with how amendments to the criminal code that allowed abortions (amendment to Section 251) the law worked."

--Anchoress 06:39, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

To Not Place vs. With No

To say Canada is one of several nations to not place legal restrictions on abortion is to misunderstand a very complicated issue. It was not by design that Canada became devoid of laws governing abortion, but through the inability of the Mulroney government to pass adequate abortion laws. Thus I simply rephrased it to say Canada is one of several nations with no legal restrictions on abortion

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../a/b/o/Talk%7EAbortion_in_Canada_Archive_3_52e0.html"

Category: Talk archives