January 2009
(Slightly shorter version published in the Winnipeg
Free Press February 4, 2009)
By Joyce
Arthur, Abortion Rights Coalition of
Canada (ARCC)
Much has
been written lately by
The main
cheerleader for re-opening the debate is Conservative MP Rod Bruinooge,
newly
appointed chair of the Parliamentary Pro-Life Caucus. Bruinooge went
public in
December with his plans for a “new era” of advocacy for the “rights of
the
unborn.” He said: “I believe that having open debate on important
topics like
this is essential for any democratic movement.”
The word “debate”
is being used as a cover for the desire to pass anti-abortion laws. The
main purpose
of the Parliamentary Pro-Life Caucus is to lobby for legal
restrictions, a goal
that clashes directly with every major party’s policy on abortion. The
Parliamentary
Pro-Life Caucus has been around for about a dozen years. It’s surely no
coincidence that from 1996 to 2008, at least 15 anti-abortion bills and
motions
have been introduced by Reform, Conservative, or Liberal MPs. All of
them
failed. (See Sidebar below for more info on
the PPLC and Harper's "hidden agenda".)
Despite their lack of
legislative success, nothing
has ever stopped anti-choice people from speaking their minds publicly.
That
debate has always been open and will never close.
However, the apparent
strength and numbers of the cyberspace
anti-choice community are in direct disproportion to the real world. To
illustrate, a wish to “Abolish
Abortion”
was the winner of CBC’s 2007 Great Canadian Wish Contest held on
Facebook, but an
Angus Reid poll (June 2008) found that only 5%
of Canadians want to make abortion illegal in all
circumstances.
It’s true
that many Canadians have said they want some restrictions on abortion.
The same
poll
cited above found that while 49 per cent of respondents want abortion
legal in
all cases, 42 per cent would allow abortion only under certain
circumstances.
For most of that demographic, this means laws against later
abortions.
However, medical procedures are governed by policy, not criminal law.
Doctors
already adhere to a Canadian Medical Association policy
that
permits abortion after 20 weeks only “under exceptional circumstances.”
Less
than 0.4 percent of abortions occur after this point, all for
compelling
reasons such as serious fetal anomalies or life-threatening maternal
health
problems. This means that current abortion practice already matches the
preferences of the vast majority of Canadians.
Such
facts have never stopped the anti-choice movement from spreading
misinformation. An anti-choice group called Signal Hill just released
the
results of their own Angus-Reid poll,
which found that 92 per cent of respondents did not know that “abortion
is
permitted at any time from conception up to the moment of birth.” Of
course, it’s
not possible to “know” something that’s not true, so this poll is a
classic
case of Garbage in, Garbage out. The poll also found that 95 per cent
of respondents
want women to be informed about all options, and of the side effects of
abortion. Since informed consent is already a required and routine part
of
delivering abortion care, that’s like asking people whether
publicly-funded
hospitals should be required to provide healthcare.
While
complaining about a lack of abortion laws in Canada, anti-choice
columnist Claire
Hoy
says that a “favorite tactic of the pro-abortion crowd is to accuse
anyone who
even questions our current lack of abortion governance as favoring
‘forcing’
women to carry babies to term.” Hoy says we’re wrong because only a
tiny
minority of Canadians believe abortion should be completely illegal.
What Hoy
overlooks however, is that the only purpose of any anti-abortion
restriction –
even a seemingly minor one – is to reduce abortion by making it harder
to
access. If even one woman fails to
obtain a desired abortion because of an anti-abortion restriction, she
is being
forced to carry a baby to term. Under
We’re
well past debating whether pregnant women are entitled to the same
human rights
as the rest of us. The Supreme Court has ruled several times that they
are,
which is why fetuses cannot hold competing rights. Instead, let’s
address the
serious problems faced by women trying to access abortion care.
Women
living in rural or conservative areas, including the Maritimes,
continue to
have poor access to abortion care. Less than 20 per cent of hospitals
in
With a large pro-choice
majority in this country,
The Parliamentary
Pro-Life Caucus prides itself on keeping its membership “secret” to
shield its renegade
members from the wrath of party leaders. (However, a 2004
article about the PPLC names 4 Senators and 46 MPs as
members, and
estimates a total membership of about 70.) Although Bruinooge claims
that the
caucus has “supporters” from every party, all known and suspected
members are
Conservatives, with a few Liberals. There is zero evidence that any NDP
or Bloc
politicians have ever been members. Even if that were so, the views of
any anti-choice
NDP or Bloc politician would have no influence within their respective
parties.
However, a sympathetic writer once
said of PPLC caucus members: “Whether or not they are
themselves pro-life,
they know enough to inform themselves of an issue that occupies the
thinking of
a fair number of their constituents.” We hope this means that one or
two Bloc
or NDP members are indeed present to keep tabs on the caucus and
surreptitiously
take notes!
The
history and longevity of the Parliamentary Pro-Life Caucus also exposes
Stephen
Harper’s legendary “hidden agenda.” Harper does indeed want to restrict
abortion by law – if he thought he could get away with it. You see,
Harper
himself used to be a member of the Parliamentary Pro-Life Caucus – as
recently
as 2004. This was two years after he
became Leader of the Opposition, and less than two years before
becoming Prime
Minister. So his vows during election campaigns not to legislate on
abortion or
re-open the debate are manipulative and pragmatic – compromises he had
to make in
order to get elected in a socially liberal country.
Indeed, neither
Harper nor his Party has any intention of letting go of their strong
anti-abortion
roots, which often shine through. At the Conservative Party convention
last
fall in