Before going on to the topic of what information is necessary for women to make an informed choice in our pro-choice environment, I want to look at how much Canadians do or do not know about prevailing laws--or lack of same.
In my last post, I explored the Supreme Court ruling that left us where we are today; i.e., with no law governing abortion whatsoever. Canada is unique among western nations in having abortion on demand at any stage of pregnancy, including partial birth abortions. Remember, Canadian women do not have a constitutional right to abortion as Americans do. The law and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms are silent on the subject.
But what do Canadians actually know about this state of affairs? First of all, this rather startling reality--80% of Canadians don't know what the law is--or isn't. Many polls have explored this, but lets look at the latest from the respected polling organization Angus Reid, taken in early January 2010.
All right, if 80% of Canadians don't know what the legal situation is governing abortion, simplistic questions like, "Do you agree with the laws governing abortion?", or, "Do you think that our abortion laws should be changed?" don't mean anything. Respondents can't give a proper answer because their basic premise is likely wrong.
Fortunately, Angus Reid delves much deeper than this superficial level. Here are some major findings:
1. 43% of Canadians believe that a woman can have an abortion, with no restrictions, only during the first trimester of her pregnancy.
2. A further 14% believe that not only is abortion limited to the first three months, but only if there is a danger to her life, if she's been raped, or the fetus has serious defects.
So there are 57% of Canadians who believe that abortion is limited to the first trimester of pregnancy. But there's more.
3. 10% of Canadians believe that a woman can have an abortion anytime during her pregnancy, but only if her life is in danger, she was raped, or if the fetus has serious defects.
So two-thirds of respondents believed that there were significant restrictions placed on the availability of abortions, either to do with the time within which it could legally be obtained, the circumstances under which a doctor could perform the surgery, or both. [As an aside, abortions for danger to life, or for reasons of rape and incest amount to only 5% of all abortions obtained.]
Now, some would say that it is our responsibility to acquaint women more fully with their rights (I guess I'm doing that right now). Should women know what the state of regulations concerning abortion really are (or complete lack of regulations to be more exact) they would swing behind the prevailing ideology; i.e., Canada should remain as the only western country with abortion on demand with no restrictions.
To get a better read on Canadian attitudes, Angus Reid in fact told respondents what the legal framework actually is, and then asked them some more questions. Armed with the proper knowledge concerning our Canadian situation, respondents then supplied the following regarding their attitudes and beliefs:
1. Knowing the real situation changed virtually nothing. I noted above that 67% of women were under the mistaken belief that abortion was restricted either in time, in reasons for abortions, or both. Having been apprised of the actual legal framework, only 30% of respondents said that they supported it--women should be able to have an abortion at any time with no restrictions.
The majority of respondents still felt that having restrictions was desirable. Here is how they answered:
2. 24% would accept abortion on demand with no restrictions for the first trimester, and thereafter only in the case of danger to health, rape, and serious fetal defects.
3. 15% would limit availability to the first three months.
4. 13% would limit availability to the first three months, and then only in the case of the horrid triumvirate--health, rape and fetal defects.
That adds up to over half of Canadians who could, more or less, accept abortion during the first trimester only. It is fair to say, however, that only 5% would abolish abortion entirely.
5. 6% would allow abortion at any time, but only in the case of the three conditions.
Beyond this, respondents felt that the following further conditions ought to prevail:
1. 41% would restrict public funding for abortions only to medical emergencies.
2. 53% would require parental consent for females under 18 who want to abort (right now no such consent is required).
3. 79% would make it mandatory for health workers to provide information regarding alternatives to abortion.
And finally, female respondents were more likely then men to support our prevailing legal framework--but only half of the women indicated this.
These findings appear to me to make the link between unfettered access to abortion, and full human rights for women, somewhat more tenuous. Presumably the 70% of respondents who accepted restrictions limited to time and/or medical factors believe in women's rights. Yet they did not feel that this belief was diminished by accepting some restrictions on access.
Interestingly, as I have noted before, heroes such as Madame Justice Wilson and Dr. Henry Morgentaler* (Order of Canada), believe likewise.
-------------------------------------------------------------
*Morgentaler was greatly criticized by some abortion advocates because he would not permit the abortion of unborn babies at his clinics beyond 24 weeks gestation. His position was, “We don’t abort babies, we want to abort fetuses before they become babies … around 24 weeks I have ethical problems doing that.”
In my last post, I explored the Supreme Court ruling that left us where we are today; i.e., with no law governing abortion whatsoever. Canada is unique among western nations in having abortion on demand at any stage of pregnancy, including partial birth abortions. Remember, Canadian women do not have a constitutional right to abortion as Americans do. The law and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms are silent on the subject.
All right, if 80% of Canadians don't know what the legal situation is governing abortion, simplistic questions like, "Do you agree with the laws governing abortion?", or, "Do you think that our abortion laws should be changed?" don't mean anything. Respondents can't give a proper answer because their basic premise is likely wrong.
Fortunately, Angus Reid delves much deeper than this superficial level. Here are some major findings:
1. 43% of Canadians believe that a woman can have an abortion, with no restrictions, only during the first trimester of her pregnancy.
2. A further 14% believe that not only is abortion limited to the first three months, but only if there is a danger to her life, if she's been raped, or the fetus has serious defects.
So there are 57% of Canadians who believe that abortion is limited to the first trimester of pregnancy. But there's more.
3. 10% of Canadians believe that a woman can have an abortion anytime during her pregnancy, but only if her life is in danger, she was raped, or if the fetus has serious defects.
So two-thirds of respondents believed that there were significant restrictions placed on the availability of abortions, either to do with the time within which it could legally be obtained, the circumstances under which a doctor could perform the surgery, or both. [As an aside, abortions for danger to life, or for reasons of rape and incest amount to only 5% of all abortions obtained.]
Now, some would say that it is our responsibility to acquaint women more fully with their rights (I guess I'm doing that right now). Should women know what the state of regulations concerning abortion really are (or complete lack of regulations to be more exact) they would swing behind the prevailing ideology; i.e., Canada should remain as the only western country with abortion on demand with no restrictions.
To get a better read on Canadian attitudes, Angus Reid in fact told respondents what the legal framework actually is, and then asked them some more questions. Armed with the proper knowledge concerning our Canadian situation, respondents then supplied the following regarding their attitudes and beliefs:
The majority of respondents still felt that having restrictions was desirable. Here is how they answered:
2. 24% would accept abortion on demand with no restrictions for the first trimester, and thereafter only in the case of danger to health, rape, and serious fetal defects.
3. 15% would limit availability to the first three months.
4. 13% would limit availability to the first three months, and then only in the case of the horrid triumvirate--health, rape and fetal defects.
That adds up to over half of Canadians who could, more or less, accept abortion during the first trimester only. It is fair to say, however, that only 5% would abolish abortion entirely.
5. 6% would allow abortion at any time, but only in the case of the three conditions.
Beyond this, respondents felt that the following further conditions ought to prevail:
1. 41% would restrict public funding for abortions only to medical emergencies.
2. 53% would require parental consent for females under 18 who want to abort (right now no such consent is required).
3. 79% would make it mandatory for health workers to provide information regarding alternatives to abortion.
And finally, female respondents were more likely then men to support our prevailing legal framework--but only half of the women indicated this.
These findings appear to me to make the link between unfettered access to abortion, and full human rights for women, somewhat more tenuous. Presumably the 70% of respondents who accepted restrictions limited to time and/or medical factors believe in women's rights. Yet they did not feel that this belief was diminished by accepting some restrictions on access.
Interestingly, as I have noted before, heroes such as Madame Justice Wilson and Dr. Henry Morgentaler* (Order of Canada), believe likewise.
-------------------------------------------------------------
*Morgentaler was greatly criticized by some abortion advocates because he would not permit the abortion of unborn babies at his clinics beyond 24 weeks gestation. His position was, “We don’t abort babies, we want to abort fetuses before they become babies … around 24 weeks I have ethical problems doing that.”
No comments:
Post a Comment