The Anti-Choice Movement In Canada

Today, the availability of birth control is taken for granted. There was a time, not long passed, during which the subject was illegal (“Margaret Sanger,” 2013, p.1). That did not stop the resilient leader of the birth control movement. Margaret Sanger was a nurse and women’s activist. While working as a nurse, Sanger treated many women who had suffered from unsafe abortions or tried to self-induce abortion (p.1). Seeing this devastation and noting that it was mainly low income women suffering from these problems, she was inspired to dedicate her life to educating women on family planning—even though the discussion of which was highly illegal at the time (p.1). She was often in trouble with

In a time fraught with hot button issues, one that polarizes perhaps more than any other is that of abortion. Unfortunately, it is also an issue that is difficult to write about while remaining unbiased. Paul Stark’s “How Abortion Hurts Women” and Sarah Barnes’ “The Long Term Effects of Abortion on Women” both set out to prove that abortion has serious side effects on the affected party. Both Stark and Barnes cite several studies done in both America and abroad to support their claims, as well as, in Barnes case, offering their own insights on the matter. It seems that both authors purpose is to enlighten their audiences on the under-reported effects of abortion on women in order to spark a new conversation that doesn’t center around the unborn

In the article Stop calling abortion a ‘difficult decision’, Janet Harris suggests abortion isn't a burdensome decision to make individuals over think. Relating a Harris’s own experience on abortion, her only question was “How quickly can I get this over with?” Harris proclaims advocates on both sides of the issue forms statements by using “difficult decision” which depicts the meaning of the situation. Harris lists, surveys on women in relation to abortions to emphasize the choices was not a perplex decision. The author's purpose is to reveal seeking an abortion is straightforward in order to end dehumanizing women on their options. Janet’s annoyed tone desires the advocates on both sides of the abortion debate.

To prove that the Charter protects some rights but not all, a court case that involved Dr Henry Morgentaler and the Supreme Court of Canada was successful after trials. Before this case, women were only allowed to have an abortion after proper certification of approval from a hospital's Therapeutic Abortion Committee. Three doctors including Morgentaler set up an abortion clinic that allowed women to have an abortion without a certification of approval. He was later charged with illegal abortion under section 251 of the Criminal Code. Morgentaler argued that women had full right on deciding whether or not they wanted an abortion. This law was struck down as unconstitutional as it violated a woman’s right according to section 7 on the Charter.

The Queen vs. Davis case concerns the murder trial of Arthur Paul Davis and Alice Davis that occurred in 1875. In it, they were tried and convicted of murder for conducting an abortion; the killing of a fetus and subsequently causing death of the victims, Catherine Laing and Jane Vaughn Gilmour. This essay will examine the historical context of the case, what the trial reveals about the nature of women’s lives in Toronto during the 1870s as subordinate women who are deemed as caretakers and how women managed to end unwanted pregnancies. During the late 19th century ending an unwanted pregnancy was an illegal offence because it was considered unethical to kill a fetus. Women were not able to access safer alternatives such as

Susan Sherwin’s view on abortion is primarily focused through the lens of feminist philosophy. Her article focuses primarily on how the feminist view provides more holistic, and less cold view on the topic of abortion that is more inclusive of the mother. The feminist view of abortion is primarily focused on looking at the factors that affect the mother through the process of the abortion, such as a woman’s feelings around the fetus, is conception, her partner, and her obligations. These are all factors that are not usually thought of by non-feminist thinkers. This is usually because the discussion around this topic is, as the author puts it “generally grounded in masculinist concepts of freedom (such as privacy, individual choice, and individuals’ property rights with respect to their own bodies)” (Sherwin.1997, 100). This view, as she puts it, primarily focuses on the morality and legal aspects of abortion. The basis of Sherwin’s paper centers around a feminist model from which to look at abortion. This model takes into account the emotional impact that an unwanted pregnancy has on the woman, who will be impacted most by this event. It gives sole power of design to the woman, who “may make mistakes in their moral judgements, but no one else can be assumed to have the authority to evaluate and overrule their judgements”. (Sherwin.1997, 102) Sherwin also advocates against the division of the mother and the fetus as separate entities during bioethical discussions. This also

Out of all modern social controversies, perhaps the most heated controversy is that of abortion. In today’s society you are either a Pro-life or a Pro-choice, there is not a middle ground. Pro-life are individuals who believe abortion is immoral and should be stop for the wellbeing of women and unborn babies. In contrast, the Pro-choice individuals do not necessarily promote abortion, they just believe women should be the ones to make decisions over their bodies and health. Although the two main sides of the abortion debate have concerns for human life, pro-life activists worries more about the fetus and morals, a clear difference from the pro-choice that worries more for the women and their rights. Based on the points I explored, the pro-choice arguments are stronger than pro-life arguments. Most of both groups arguments comes from peer-reviewed researches from well-known sources to support each individual concept. Effects on women,socio-politics, and fetus are some of the main point of conflicts between the pro-life and pro-choice advocates.

In the 19th century, after tremendous progress in surgical processes, abortions were then conducted by surgeons on a wide scale, while medical abortions are used concurrently. However, as abortion technology prospers, legal restrictions came with it. In 1803, a English statute abolished the previously-legal first trimester abortions. The act “condemned the willful, malicious, and unlawful use of any medical substance when used with the intent to induce abortion” (Stern, 1968). In 1821, Connecticut enabled the first statute in the United States regulating abortions. Within 10 years, states like Illinois, Ohio, New York, Alabama, and others enabled abortion restriction statutes, and by 1968, 50 of the 51 jurisdictions in the United States have prohibited abortion except in the case women’s life is endangered (Ibid., at 3). In 1965, Britain, however, legalized abortion for “medical conditions of the mother, for socio-economic reasons, for eugenic considerations, and for pregnancies which resulted from rape or incestuous intercourse”, which is still law today (Ibid, at 4). In Canada, abortion has been legalized since 1969 through Bill C-150 if “a committee of three physicians determined that the pregnancy was a threat to the woman's life or health” (Norman, 2012). In 1988, Canadian Supreme Court struck down bill C-150’s provision requiring committee approval to receive an abortion in its decision R v Morgentaler, legalizing abortion across Canada for any reasons (Ibid.).

In July of 2015, Canada became the fifty-eighth country to legalize RU-486 (a.k.a. mifepristone or “the abortion pill”). Using a social feminist method and taking an informational/qualitative approach, I will ask and attempt to answer open-ended questions regarding the legalization of the drug in Canada from a feminist perspective. Why did it take so long for Canada to legalize the drug when it’s been available since the 80’s, the same decade in which Canada decriminalized abortion? What medical and ethical objections to RU-486 exist and who is raising them? What are the potential implications of introducing RU-486 into Canada? What other examples of the government stonewalling of women’s issues (pertaining to reproductive health and legal

The topic of aborting an innocent fetus has been overwhelmingly controversial in the United States. The two sides to this ongoing debate is pro-life advocates and pro-choice advocates. Abortion is the ending of a pregnancy by removing a fetus or embryo before it can survive outside the uterus; whether it is an unplanned or unwanted pregnancy. Abortions are most often performed during the first twenty-eight weeks of pregnancy and can be performed as a medical or surgical procedure. Medical abortions include two types of abortion pills; while the surgical procedures include vacuum aspiration and dilation and evacuation. Ultimately, I am one of the many “pro-lifers”, and I strongly agree that abortion should be illegal because it negatively affects our people. Women across the nation are becoming impregnated and following a short amount of judgement time, turn to abortion to solve their problems but in the end hurt themselves with this decision. Abortions should be illegal because it is immoral and unconstitutional, causes severe mental and physical issues, and negatively impacts the economy. “During the ancient Roman times it has been supposed that abortion and the destruction of unwanted children was permissible, but as our civilization has aged, it seems that such acts were no longer acceptable by rational human beings, so that in 1948, Canada along with most other nations in the world signed a declaration of the United Nations promising every human being the right to life”

Before 1988, abortion in Canada was illegal in all providences however due to the relatively new Charter of Rights and Freedoms Canadian doctors were able to challenge the law. According to section 7, the Charter “guarantees the life, liberty and personal security of all Canadians. It also demands that governments respect the basic principles of justice whenever it intrudes on those rights.”(Section 7, Charter of Rights and Freedoms). Thus the law banning abortion was a violation of the rights guaranteed in the Charter, and as one of the prevailing justices in the case stated: "The right to liberty...guarantees a degree of personal autonomy over important decisions intimately affecting his or her private life. ... The decision whether or not to terminate a pregnancy is essentially a moral decision and in a free and democratic society, the conscience of the individual must be paramount to that of the state." The Charter further protects the right of choice, moral decisions, and freedom of personal

I have chosen to use an article called, "Canada is a Complicit Partner in Sex-Selection Abortion," written by Andrea Mrozek. I found this article on the Huffington Post website. The author, Andrea Mrozek, is a program director at Cardus Family and founding director of an organization called, ProWomanProLife. She has written many powerful pieces focusing on childcare, feminism, women 's issues, education, and how the family affects different aspects of society. Not only is she a very influential author, but she also speaks about these topics at various events. Within the ProWomanProLife program she acts as a spokesperson, speaking out about pro life. The following quote from Mrozek gives a pretty accurate description of her viewpoint on abortion. "Top-heavy legislation, that might criminalize abortion, for example, gets us nowhere with a culture of women who believe abortion to be anything from a necessary evil, to a compassionate act, to completely neutral. We must be able to discuss the issue with complete and total freedom, and to highlight how uncompassionate abortion actually is, from a woman’s perspective.” (Mrozek, 2016)

Pro-choice has been a major topic ever since the women’s movements started in the early 1970’s, a question sometimes asked is that, if part of the population are so pro-life and worry about protecting a fetus, how come when the child is conceived they suddenly bash at you for having that unwanted child anyways, and that is hypocritical. In this essay, details include would be why people choose to be pro-choice, NARAL Pro-Choice America, the battle for reproductive justice for women and their right to make decisions for their body, advocates that are pro-choice, proposals for a pro-choice government, and Tomi Lahren being fired for stating she was pro-choice.

Extremely successful academics, government officials, and authors such as Anne Marie Slaughter, who broke the glass ceilings and fought to prove women’s mettle but ultimately decided to pursue a more traditional family life in pursuit of her goals and happiness, fell victim to the very ideology that is threatening women today. Those reactions caused her to write her influential article “Why Women still can’t have it all.” Slaughters take on these events demonstrates the very essence of todays Femenist movement that is based on a bigoted set of beliefs that ostracize women that decide to take a more traditional approach to their lives. Furthermore, accounts such as Sheryl Gay Stolberg’s in her January 18, 2017 article, “Views on Abortion Strain

The most controversial field of feminist’s actions is women’s rights to the control over their bodies with respect to fertility, sexual relationships, rape and medical power over women’s health. Male control over women’s bodies has also traditionally expressed itself through