Below is a selection of letters to the editor written by spokespersons for ARCC-CDAC, or by coalition members of ARCC-CDAC.
Rights, Wrongs, and Abortion
Re: Canada Needs An Abortion Law, Jonathan Kay, March 27
Mr. Kay's call for an abortion law is based on anti-abortion ideology, not on fact or reason. There's no "moral necessity" to restrict abortion, just as there's no moral necessity to restrict childbirth or heart surgery. No patronizing laws are needed to force women (and doctors) to be responsible. In reality, the abortion practice Mr. Kay describes as an acceptable solution -- abortion on request in the early stages of gestation, and later abortions only under extraordinary circumstances -- is already the practice in Canada, as 90% of abortions are done by 12 weeks and 98% by 16 weeks. A mere 0.4% occur after 20 weeks, virtually all because of serious fetal or maternal health problems. The lack of abortion laws in Canada is not "shameful"; on the contrary, Canada is a beacon to the rest of the world. Restrictions on abortion in other countries are artifacts from the days when abortion was a criminal act, or products of religious ideology. These laws act only to reduce or delay access to abortion, and make them more dangerous. Abortion is not an "evil to be avoided." Instead, we should be trying to reduce unintended pregnancies.
Joyce Arthur, Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada
At the heart of the abortion issue
Margaret Somerville's op-ed piece (You can be a little bit pro-life, Feb 1) omits key facts that refute her conclusion that Canada should regulate abortion.
Somerville counts 500 "post-viability" abortions in Canada each year, without defining that term or explaining the reasons for such abortions. In Canada, this very small number (about 0.4% of all abortions) refers to those performed between 20 and 23 weeks gestation. Fetuses are generally not viable until after 24 weeks. Virtually all these abortions are done in cases where the fetus is gravely or fatally impaired, or where the woman's life or health is seriously at risk. Although a few abortions may be done "post-viability," the fetuses are not viable at all. Rare abortions after 23 weeks are only done in Canada in cases of lethal fetal abnormality, where the fetus cannot survive after birth.
If a woman desperately needs an abortion between about 20 and 24 weeks for a compelling social reason, such as a teenager who was in pregnancy denial, or a woman victimized by domestic abuse, she may be sent to the U.S. for abortion care. That's because there are no providers in Canada willing to do late abortions for these so-called "elective" reasons. But there is virtually no demand for them anyway.
It is essential that very difficult decisions around rare late-term abortions be left to the discretion of medical professionals, in consultation with their patients. Government has no business dictating how and when doctors may provide medically required services to women.
Joyce Arthur, Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada (ARCC-CDAC)
Re: your editorial (Renewed U.S. abortion debate invites re-examination here, too, Feb 26)
Restrictions on abortion in other countries are artifacts of the days when abortion was a criminal act. The only purpose they serve is to reduce access to abortion, institutionalize the stigma of abortion, marginalize abortion outside the healthcare system, breed hypocrisy and disrespect for the law, and of course, violate the human rights of women.
Canada serves as an important model for the rest of the world, because we have proven that regulating abortion does not reduce abortion or make it safer. In fact, the lack of restrictions is exactly what helps women access abortion as early as possible, and therefore as safely as possible. In Canada, 90% of abortions are done by 12 weeks, and 98% by 16 weeks, a much better record than the U.S., where restrictions actually delay abortion for many women. No laws are needed to "force" women to be responsible - how insulting and sexist! Further, regulating abortion amounts to discrimination against women, since only women get pregnant. Such laws also insult healthcare workers and dangerously interfere with the integrity of the doctor/patient relationship.
The state's interest in fetuses is best assured by helping pregnant women get the pre-natal care and resources they need. The pregnant woman is the only fetal advocate we need, and the only one we should trust.
Joyce Arthur, Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada
Abortion limits are tight enough, writer argues
Re: "Choice, yes, within reason: Renewed U.S. abortion debate invites re-examination here, too," Editorial, Feb. 26.
It was disappointing to see the Herald support the propagation of the myth of late-term abortion in Canada. If we are going to have to again debate the issue of recriminalizing abortion in Canada, I would hope we can at least do it based on the facts, not propaganda and outlandish conjecture. It's unfortunate the Herald did not bother to talk to providers about the clinical reasons for an abortion past 20 weeks and get a few facts before commenting with such misplaced moral superiority. I think the perspective of honest people who truly believe they are doing the right thing by helping women and their families in difficult situations is worth getting. To rely solely on the accusations of people and groups dedicated to making abortion illegal does not present a fair, balanced or accurate picture.
Late-term abortion in Canada is rare, difficult to access and is practised only when serious maternal and fetal health problems are present. If Canadians believe legislators are better at judging these situations than doctors, women and their families, and want to give them the right to interfere in these most intimate decisions, then so be it. But if we are going to recriminalize abortion in these cases, let's at least be clear that these are the cases we are talking about -- women with pregnancies that have tragically gone wrong, not women irresponsibly changing their minds moments before birth. That notion is just ridiculous.
If anyone really questions this, I challenge them to try to get an appointment for an abortion anywhere in Canada for "any reason, at any time," or "just before birth," as has been stated in the Herald in recent weeks, or even after the 20th week of pregnancy. The editorial patronizingly states women should be expected to make "timely and responsible decisions." Actually, women do. Close to 90 per cent of women manage to obtain a procedure before the end of the 12th week. Less than one per cent of procedures in Canada are done beyond the 20th week. In countries such as the U.S. and Great Britain, where laws criminalizing abortion exist, the access statistics are much the same. In fact, Canada's overall abortion rate is much lower than the U.S., and the same or lower than most countries with abortion laws listed in the editorial. A logical person would therefore conclude health-care policy in Canada is successfully regulating abortion services.
If making sure women have early abortions is truly the issue here, then lobby for speedier access within a health-care system that forces women to wait two to four weeks before being able to obtain an abortion. Lobby to make sex education and birth control more available, as it is in France. Lobby Health Canada to bring mifepristone (RU486) into the country (as they also did in France) so women have more access to earlier terminations. Abortion practice is apparently the only health service many anti-choice proponents believe will run amok if not legally restrained. It is odd that some people would trust doctors, professional organizations and other medical authorities to provide ethical regulation and sound medical practice in every area of medicine except abortion care. If that's the case -- that we cannot trust doctors to follow current regulations -- then the onus is on those who believe this to prove the practice is being abused and their claims are justified.
And the evidence needs to go beyond a few sketchy anecdotes, conspiracy theories about data collection, and unfounded hypotheses.
Celia Posyniak is Executive Director of the Kensington Clinic.
(Note: The Kensington Clinic is a coalition member of ARCC-CDAC)