The Canadian Medical Association at its recent annual meeting in Sydney skirted the question of fetal rights by deciding to refer the issue to its board of directors for study at some later, undetermined time.
Dr. Granger Avery of Port McNeill, B.C. had raised a motion to have the CMA press Ottawa to review legal protection for unborn children in cases where the mother clearly puts the child at risk. His motion was prompted by the case of a pregnant 22-year-old Winnipeg glue-sniffer who was ordered by a judge to undergo a rehab program despite the fact that a fetus had no legal rights. The courts later threw out the judge’s order.
“It makes no intuitive sense to protect a child only following birth when he or she may have suffered preventable damage,” said Avery. “I think we should be striking while the iron is hot. If the government is to move on an issue which is difficult to address, then it should be encouraged now while the public has the issue in front of it.”
But Avery met opposition from some doctors, including Dr. Andre Lalonde, an executive member of the Society of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. “I think it’s very dangerous and it could push back women’s rights to the 1930’s. If you try to extend fetal rights, then where are you going to stop? You’re going to get back to the issue: ‘Is the fetus alive? Is it not alive?”’
Dr. Robert Pankratz, president of Canadian Physicians for Life, noted the delegates to the CMA meeting based their decision to avoid the fetal rights question of their perceptions of what the membership-at-large thought, rather than an actual poll. He pointed to a Physicians for Life poll which demonstrated “quite clearly” that physicians in general are not in favor of abortion.
“This was kind of suppressed ignored and downplayed because it is such a political hot potato—a so-called woman’s rights issue,” he said, adding it would have been “a wonderful thing” to have fetal rights recognized.
“We have maintained all along that when you’re treating a patient who’s pregnant, you’re not treating just the one patient. It’s a very strange circumstance when you end up treating only one patient if the baby is unwanted, but two patients if the baby is wanted.”
Pankratz said most Canadian physicians recognize the fetus is important to society and to their medical practices. “We go through all kinds of manoeuvres to ensure the safe passage of the fetus into society.”
The CMA also decided to amend its code of ethics this year to declare that a doctor should not discriminate against a patient based on 12 grounds – including sexual orientation. But it gave doctors an out by allowing them to refuse to accept a patient for “legitimate” reasons without defining what that meant.
It is thought the latter was enacted to permit Ontario doctors embroiled in a fee dispute with the provincial government the opportunity to use patients as “bargaining chips.”
Pankratz noted that sexual orientation has become a big political buzzword in the medical field. “I don’t have a problem with non-discrimination,” he said. “I don’t believe anyone would have a problem treating people with non-heterosexual orientations… But the problem arises when non-discrimination blurs the distinction with giving people a right to promote a certain lifestyle.”
Aid to Women break-in
An unsecured door is believed to have led to a Labor Day weekend burglary at Toronto’s Aid to Women office.
Sometime between August 30 and September 2, thieves gained access to the Gerrard St. East building and made off with a computer, a video cassette recorder, an electric typewriter and a safe containing about $1,600 worth of property belonging to Aid to Women volunteer Bill Whatcott.
“The computer will be hard to replace, but the biggest loss was the personal property.” Whatcott told The Interim September 4.
The stolen computer contained the names and addresses of all Aid to Women’s financial supporters. Aid to Women officials ask that supporters will be patient as the agency rebuilds its database.
Aid to Women staff took small consolation in the fact that no damage or vandalism occurred during the break-in.
Police investigated the premises after the burglary was reported, but they failed to come up with any leads. It is unlikely the stolen goods will be recovered.
Unfortunately, Aid to Women is not insured against theft.
“We’re confident the theft won’t affect the work we are doing for pregnant women in distress,” Whatcott said. “We’ll have to find a way to replace the stolen goods.”
Whatcott speculated that street people living near the Aid to Women office were responsible for the break-in.