babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics

Topic Closed  Topic Closed


Post New Topic  
Topic Closed  Topic Closed
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » walking the talk   » feminism   » New law allows children to sue their moms for in-utero injuries

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: New law allows children to sue their moms for in-utero injuries
ShyViolet
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6611

posted 03 December 2005 10:57 PM      Profile for ShyViolet     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
http://sympatico.msn.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2005/12/02/albertasuit051202.html

quote:
Alberta has become the first province in Canada to enact legislation allowing children to sue their mothers for injuries suffered in the womb. But the law applies only to damage suffered in car accidents.

....

In a ruling six years ago, the Supreme Court of Canada said a child can't sue its mother for damages suffered in the womb. But the ruling also left a small and very narrow loophole, saying provinces could allow a child to sue its mother, but only in the case of a car accident.

Alberta is now the first province to allow this.

"Had the father been driving, the suit could have been against the father," said Shannon Haggerty of the Alberta Justice Department. "But since the mother was at fault in that case, there was no ability for the child to go after the mother. So this will allow for the mother to also be part of that scope."

....

Other are worried the legislation could open the door to infringement of women's right, such as "suing a woman for causing brain damage in her fetus because she drank or smoked during her pregnancy," said Joyce Arthur of the Abortion Rights Coaltion. "And of course the anti-abortion groups could exploit the law as well."


I know that there was a thread on this, but I can't seem to find it.


From: ~Love is like pi: natural, irrational, and very important~ | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged
Ron Webb
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2256

posted 04 December 2005 12:21 AM      Profile for Ron Webb     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
IMHO children ought to be able to sue their mother for truly reckless behaviour, including chronic alcohol abuse or heavy smoking (but not for the occasional lapse in judgement or will power). But car accidents? There a reason why they're called "accidents"...

As for abortion, well, the whole point of an abortion is that it does not result in a child. There is no child, there never was a child, and there never will be a child -- therefore there was and is no injury to a child.


From: Winnipeg | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged
Stargazer
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6061

posted 04 December 2005 10:27 AM      Profile for Stargazer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Oh goody! Then I think it only fair that children get to sue their fathers for having sperm laced with narcotic drugs and alcohol or any other chemical which could lead to future harm to the child.

Gripes, progressives liking this idea? Sacry that.


From: Inside every cynical person, there is a disappointed idealist. | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Stargazer
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6061

posted 04 December 2005 10:30 AM      Profile for Stargazer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
And while we're at it, lets add in any genes of laziness, shiftiness and lack of personal responsibility. Cause everyone knows biology is the only determinent of a person's outcome. If we go back far enough we can have kids sueing grandparents and great grandparents for passing on recessive 'bad' genes. Geez, I really like how this is going.

Skdadl, get in here and help me out with this

[ 04 December 2005: Message edited by: Stargazer ]


From: Inside every cynical person, there is a disappointed idealist. | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
kuri
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4202

posted 04 December 2005 10:44 AM      Profile for kuri   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Here's the old thread. It had a vague title.

I'm very disappointed in the media coverage of this law. I haven't seen *any* story address what should be the main issue here: why anyone has to pay for treatment that sounds pretty much like primary care in a country that is supposed to have a universal health care system! Taking an end run around the insurance industry that threatens women's rights is not the solution!


From: an employer more progressive than rabble.ca | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 04 December 2005 10:49 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by kurichina:
Here's the old thread. It had a vague title.

Merci.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

Post New Topic  
Topic Closed  Topic Closed
Open Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca