From the article:

quote:

---

Yet our health system - from the politicians who oversee it to the policy makers and administrators through to the physicians and nurses who should provide non-judgmental care in public institutions - has largely failed women who seek abortions.

The failings are many and varied, but revolve principally around lack of access to timely care.

In short, the arbitrary rules that have crept into the system in the past two decades make a mockery of the Supreme Court ruling.

---

quote:

---

In Canada, fewer than one in five hospitals perform abortions. One province, Prince Edward Island, offers no abortion services at all. Another, New Brunswick, has created unjustified (and likely unconstitutional) barriers to access, requiring referrals from two doctors.

In the nation's capital, Ottawa, the wait time for an abortion stretches to six weeks, a perversity. (If there is one area of care for which there should be a wait-time guarantee, it is abortion, obviously a time-sensitive procedure.)

But the greatest injustice is that faced by Canadian women living outside major metropolitan centres, particularly those in the North.

Virtually every hospital and clinic offering abortion services in Canada is located within 150 kilometres of the U.S. border, and there is not a single abortion provider north of the Trans-Canada Highway in Ontario.

A woman in northern Manitoba, for example, needs to travel about 20 hours to access the nearest in-province abortion provider. For women in the three territories, travel can be an insurmountable obstacle.

Abortion should be covered by medicare but, in reality, it is expensive. If a woman opts for an abortion in a private clinic - something that is often necessary given the lack of service offered in hospitals - she must pay out of pocket and be reimbursed.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michelle:
This is infuriating:

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EmmaG:
Proud to be a Prince Edward Islander!

---

However, let's walk through the realities of women who can't access abortion in PEI, since you're so proud to be from there:

* Travel to another province to have an abortion, which costs time, money and privacy. This is not an option for women marginalized by poverty and abuse. Are you proud of this?

* Travel to another province to have a later-term abortion (because of time issues) than may be safe for the woman, risking health complications and longer recovery time. Still smiling?

* Not being able to have an abortion, and instead becoming a parent when this is not the choice of the woman. If financial stresses are not an issue, what kind of belief system wants enforced motherhood? What kind of children will be raised under this doctrine? What emotional damage does the mother and child incur because of this? If financial stresses are an issue, then we have that layered onto enforced motherhood. Yes, that's sure something to be proud of.

quote:

---

Originally posted by bigcitygal:
EmmaG, I understand you aren't a supporter of choice regarding access to abortion, a legal medical procedure in Canada.

However, let's walk through the realities of women who can't access abortion in PEI, since you're so proud to be from there:

* Travel to another province to have an abortion, which costs time, money and privacy. This is not an option for women marginalized by poverty and abuse. Are you proud of this?

* Travel to another province to have a later-term abortion (because of time issues) than may be safe for the woman, risking health complications and longer recovery time. Still smiling?

* Not being able to have an abortion, and instead becoming a parent when this is not the choice of the woman. If financial stresses are not an issue, what kind of belief system wants enforced motherhood? What kind of children will be raised under this doctrine? What emotional damage does the mother and child incur because of this? If financial stresses are an issue, then we have that layered onto enforced motherhood. Yes, that's sure something to be proud of.

I actually understand the anti-choice position on an intellectual level. And I sincerely mean it when I say if you're against abortion, don't have one, but nobody has the right to prevent another from making that choice.

---

Sorry, I shouldn't have even made the original comment. As per my understanding of this forum, I will be banned if I speak on this issue any further.

quote:

---

Proud to be a Prince Edward Islander!

---

quote:

---

The only thing I'll say is that there is currently a 7 yr waiting list for adopting newborns on PEI.

---

Why don't you be clear - the waiting list is for perfect white babies. There are lots of unwanted children and babies in Canada looking for homes.

I don't understand how there can be a waiting list unless people only want perfect white children, there are lots of special needs kids, siblings, and non-white children looking for something better than groups homes or foster care.

quote:

---

I don't understand how there can be a waiting list unless people only want perfect white children, there are lots of special needs kids, siblings, and non-white children looking for something better than groups homes or foster care.

---

My understanding of this, from friends who have adopted children with FASD, is that the more relevant line is the child's age. You have to wait a long time for an infant, but there are plenty of 5-year-olds in government care.

quote:

---

This is indeed a good article, but whenever I read something so negative, I cringe a little. Yes we have many access problems in Canada, but things really are not that bad! We have it GREAT compared to almost any other country in the world. And there's actually a number of inaccuracies in Picard's article.

Hospital access may have decreased over the years, but clinics have picked up the slack and more. Access has improved substantially since 1988, with 45% of abortions now done in clinics compared to 7% in 1988. All provinces with clinics pay in full for abortions at clinics, except for New Brunswick, Quebec being the latest victory. This means very, very few women actually have to pay for their abortions. Further, there is now a fund run by National Abortion Federation to help women with travel expenses or those not covered by Medicare. Women in the territories have their travel expenses covered by the government. The wait time problem in Ottawa has been fixed - the gov't increased the clinic's funding. In some provinces (eg., BC, Quebec) women ARE reimbursed if they must travel to the U.S. for an abortion. This is a tiny minority of abortions anyway. We do bady need mifepristone in Canada, but this is NOT a domestic political problem at all, it's due to the reluctance of foreign manufacturers to make an application to Health Canada.

---

quote:

---

Proud to be a Prince Edward Islander!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by EmmaG:
Sorry, I shouldn't have even made the original comment. As per my understanding of this forum, I will be banned if I speak on this issue any further.

---

Yes, you shouldn't have. And since it was trolling, after you've been warned quite a few times in the past, you'll be banned now. And if that hadn't been enough to make it clear, this rotten little quip seals it:

quote:

---

The only thing I'll say is that there is currently a 7 yr waiting list for adopting newborns on PEI. Why worry about potential emotional issues to children if you don't care if they are even born?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Scout:

I don't understand how there can be a waiting list unless people only want perfect white children, there are lots of special needs kids, siblings, and non-white children looking for something better than groups homes or foster care.

---

Most of the people looking to adopt kids are white, middle class couples who are unable to have kids on their own. And, yes, for msot of them, they are looking for newborn babies who look like them, are in good health and where the details of the father are known.

The nice university couple who accidentally get pregnant and decide to put the baby up for adoption: there will be a line a mile long of people who want to adopt that baby.

The drug addicted woman who gets prgnant and isn't sure who the father is: that's going to be a much tougher child to find a home for.

The child (not baby) in foster care with a learning disability and a history of behavioural problems: very, very difficult to find a home for them.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Indiana Jones:
Most of the people looking to adopt kids are white, middle class couples who are unable to have kids on their own. And, yes, for msot of them, they are looking for newborn babies who look like them, are in good health and where the details of the father are known.

...of course, the supply for babies in that first category is not nearly large enough to meet the demand. Lots of couples in such instances are now looking to China to adopt.

---

If they are looking to China to adopt, then the baby looking like them, the health of the baby and knnowing who the father, or indeed who the mother is, the criteria you suggested has NOT been met!

I thought the conclusion of the G&M article summed up the situation well:

quote:

---

Between the legalization of abortion in 1969 and its complete decriminalization in 1988, women fought many tough battles.

Yes, it is time to celebrate.

But there are many more battles to be fought to ensure choice is not only theoretical but real.

Too bad the public is so complacent about this important issue. Thankfully, there is a new generation of women who are redefining the struggle.

---

Since post history is not accessible, one must take the word of others that "crap" has been posted - and if one wishes to cherry pick, perhaps a cache could be assembled and held for use against many of us.

quote:

---

Originally posted by remind:

And I am beginning to see a pattern in your messaging in this thread and in your other ugly thread on Lakehead University.

---

quote:

---

Since post history is not accessible, one must take the word of others that "crap" has been posted - and if one wishes to cherry pick, perhaps a cache could be assembled and held for use against many of us.

---

Actually it’s easily available. 2 clicks away in fact. Just take a boo at anyone’s profile and voila! You can also search under their member number. Best to have the facts first eh? Then you don't look like a silly finger waving prat.

quote:

---

I mention this only because, particularly after just introducing others to Babble, I felt that EmmaG could have been treated with less boorishness. It's one thing to told not to post in a thread, quite another to be gagged on all topics.

---

Here we ago again with you bliter! Boorish is to not abide by the rules of the forum. Boorish is to suggest that we must submit to yet another anti-choicer in a progressive space in spite of the clear mandate of the forum.

She was warned repeatedly and chose to keep trolling the feminists about abortion in the FF. Boorish is to be new and continually taking other posters and the mods to task because you think we all just ain’t polite and tolerant enough in the face of non-progressive behaviour. You’re free to leave if this place ain’t to your liking.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Scout:

Indiana Jones your not trying to lecture feminists in the feminists forum about an aspect of adoption are you?

---

quote:

---

Actually it’s easily available. 2 clicks away in fact. Just take a boo at anyone’s profile and voila! You can also search under their member number. Best to have the facts first eh? Then you don't look like a silly finger waving prat.

---

Thanks for the info. Could have done without the insult. My point on boorishness still stands.

quote:

---

...they are looking for newborn babies who look like them...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by bliter:
Scout: Thanks for the info. Could have done without the insult. My point on boorishness still stands.

---

quote:

---

Perhaps I couldn't help contrasting the two or three responses, following EmmaG's first post.

---

Now, I am asking you nicely, to step away from this thread and from the feminist forum. You have absolutely no right to come in here an lecture us on our behaviour, and tell us what you think we should do, or should not do, nor upon how we should behave.

Thank you in advance for your compliance.

[ 24 January 2008: Message edited by: remind ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by martin dufresne:
That is generally the rationale for the racist policy of keeping "others" out of Our Space. Whatever happened to the children's best interest criterion?

---

quote:

---

Thanks for the info. Could have done without the insult. My point on boorishness still stands.

---

Since, AFTER THAT POST, Scout has addressed and quoted me, I feel entitled to answer here.

You speak to others about lecturing but, clearly, are not averse to engaging in it.

You pounced on an error and chose to be unnecessarily snotty. If I was unfamiliar with the
profile icon, it was because I had been used to a board where "profile" was not only spelled out with the poster's message but in the menu.

Once again, bliter, if you don't like the moderating, you can feel free to bring it up in rabble reactions instead of derailing yet another thread.

quote:

---

You're just giving him what he wants.

---

Jebus, now I'm doing it. Can we continue this discussion in rabble reactions if it's that important?

[ 24 January 2008: Message edited by: Michelle ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michelle:
You're just giving him what he wants.

---

quote:

---

Pro-life ad pulled from bus shelters
The city has pulled a pro-life ad from its bus shelters after a handful of complaints.

"We don't think it's appropriate for that medium to be used for controversial community messaging," said Hull.

The same ad is running in cities across the country. Schultz said Fredericton was the only city to reject the shelter poster after a council vote.

Councillor Brian McHattie said he asked for the ads to come down after his office heard from upset residents. "For me personally, it definitely was offensive." Personal opinions on abortion aside, he said the city shouldn't been seen to support or promote either side of such a controversial issue. "It's totally inappropriate for the city."

---

http://www.thespec.com/printArticle/310754

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barbara Freeman:
Can a case be made for false advertising here? Does anybody know anything more about this ad?

---

Indirectly, that's what happened here:

quote:

---

Metrobus has pulled an anti-abortion advertisement from its buses and shelters in St. John's after complaints from the public.

The ad, funded by the Right to Life Association as part of a national campaign, appeared on at least two buses in the N.L. capital that were used as travelling billboards before it was withdrawn.

Critics said the ad gave the impression that late-term abortions are common in Canada.

The ad reads: "Nine months… the length of time an abortion is allowed in Canada. Abortion. Have we gone too far?"

Metrobus removed it Thursday night, saying the ad was misleading because there's no evidence that late-term abortions are common.

"We did do some research," said Metrobus manager Judy Powell.

She said the transit company took its lead from the code of the Advertising Council of Canada. One of the provisions states that if a statement is misleading or inaccurate, it should be removed.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barbara Freeman:
Hi all - I was watching CityTV from Victoria BC the other day and saw a pro-life ad aimed at young women. Basically, a female basketball coach was regretting the abortion she had never come to terms with, and wanted to warn her team members. At least, that's how I received this message. The gist was, abortion will cause you great psychological damage so beware. Can a case be made for false advertising here? Does anybody know anything more about this ad? I can't even remember who is running it - possibly Birthright.

---

[ 11 February 2008: Message edited by: martin dufresne ]

International Women's Day Symposium:
Canadian and International Laws and Policies on Abortion and their Impact on Women's Rights

Wednesday, March 5, 2008
The Law Society of Upper Canada
130 Queen Street West, Toronto

4 p.m. - Panel Discussion - Donald Lamont Learning Centre
6 p.m. - Reception - Convocation Hall

The Law Society of Upper Canada, the Barbra Schlifer Commemorative Clinic, the Feminist Legal Analysis Section of the Ontario Bar Association and the Women's Law Association of Ontario are pleased to invite members of the legal profession and the public to their annual symposium and reception to celebrate International Women's Day.

Is the right to abortion a litmus test for women's rights and status in a society?

2008 marks the 20th anniversary of the Supreme Court of Canada decision in R. v. Morgentaler, which struck down the law on abortion in the Criminal Code. A panel of legal experts will discuss the significance of the decision in Canada and its impact on women's rights. Speakers will discuss international perspectives on abortion and what they mean for the status of women in different jurisdictions. Following the discussion, a reception will be held to celebrate International Women's Day.

ADMISSION IS FREE

quote:

---

( . . . )I can take a woman, in the biggest trouble she has ever experienced in her life, and by performing a five-minute operation, in comfort and dignity, I can give her back her life. ( . . . )

I am honoured to be speaking today, and honored to call Henry Morgentaler my friend. I have been an abortion provider since 1972. Why do I do abortions, and why do I continue to do abortions, despite two murder attempts?

The first time I started to think about abortion was in 1960, when I was in second year medical school. I was assigned the case of a young woman who had died of a septic abortion. She had aborted herself using slippery elm bark ( . . . ) It is called slippery elm because, when it gets wet, it feels slippery. This makes it easier to slide slender pieces through the cervix where they absorb water, expand, dilate the cervix, produce infection and induce abortion. The young woman in our case developed an overwhelming infection. At autopsy she had multiple abscesses throughout her body, in her brain, lungs, liver and abdomen.

I have never forgotten that case. ( . . . )

---

[ 17 February 2008: Message edited by: martin dufresne ]

quote:

---

Chillingly, as the Lancet paper shows, there is no relationship between the legality and the incidence of abortion. Women with no access to contraceptives will try to terminate unwanted pregnancies. A World Health Organisation report shows that almost half the world's abortions are unauthorised and unsafe. In East Africa and Latin America, where religious conservatives ensure that terminations remain illegal, they account for almost all abortions. Methods include drinking turpentine or bleach, shoving sticks or coathangers into the uterus, and pummelling the abdomen, which often causes the uterus to burst, killing the patient. The WHO estimates that between 65,000 and 70,000 women die as a result of illegal abortions every year, while 5 million suffer severe complications. These effects, the organisation says, "are the visible consequences of restrictive legal codes".

---

George Benoit's report

quote:

---

A study published in the Lancet shows that between 1995 and 2003, the global rate of induced abortions fell from 35 per 1,000 women each year to 29. This period coincides with the rise of the "globalised secular culture" the Pope laments. When the figures are broken down, it becomes clear that, apart from the former Soviet Union, abortion is highest in conservative and religious societies. In largely secular western Europe, the average rate is 12 abortions per 1,000 women. In the more religious southern European countries, the average rate is 18. In the US, where church attendance is still higher, there are 23 abortions for every 1,000 women, the highest level in the rich world. In central and South America, where the Catholic church holds greatest sway, the rates are 25 and 33 respectively. In the very conservative societies of east Africa, it's 39. One abnormal outlier is the UK: our rate is six points higher than that of our western European neighbours

---

quote:

---

In the USA, contraception is available at virtually every convenience store.

---

Condoms? Aren't perfect by a long shot anyway but when your preaching, and I mean preaching, abstinence only and not educating kids on birth control all the condoms in the world won't help if they are afraid to buy them because it's "wrong".

quote:

---

Originally posted by Scout:

Condoms? Aren't perfect by a long shot anyway but when your preaching, and I mean preaching, abstinence only and not educating kids on birth control all the condoms in the world won't help if they are afraid to buy them because it's "wrong".

---

quote:

---

And if kids think using condoms are wrong, these are presumably the same kids who think pre-marital sex is wrong to begin with.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stargazer:
Dr.HIlarious, would you might posting links to any stats to back up your claim??

---

In my perception, it won't happen, because there aren't any, in fact there are many that are quite the opposite of what is being said by Dr Hilarious. There are many stats that say quite the opposite on threads here in the feminist forum.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Scout:
I don't know she claims to be an Epidemiologist and interested in curing Aids so it's this lack of knowledge or stats seems odd.

---

Exactly. I look specifically at how AIDS is spread and what measures can contain it. Many of the same principles would apply to STDs.

Obviously, there is a link between the lack of availability of protection (namely condoms) and infection. But where AIDS has become epidemic, it is a matter of condoms being restricted or information being withheld by Western aid groups(in addition to cultural stigma against using them).

quote:

---

Popline makes abortion a dirty word
Don't know what Popline is? Popline is a reproductive health data base funded by USAID.,,,But it seems, on April 1st, USAID and Popline adjusted their search function to add a few stopwords and some researchers noticed. (An email exchange you won't want to pass over.)

This is where you get to play a bit of a game. Go to the Popline search page and type in "Abortion".

---

quote:

---

Johns Hopkins officials restored full access yesterday to a reproductive health Web site funded by the government, after learning that searches containing the word "abortion" were being intentionally restricted and that thousands of studies were being hidden from easy view.

The change came after librarians and women's health advocates flooded the blogosphere - and e-mail boxes at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health - with complaints of censorship.

---

h/t BnR

[ 05 April 2008: Message edited by: remind ]

[ 08 April 2008: Message edited by: Pride for Red Dolores ]

quote:

---

Abortion is possibly the only essential medical service that does not meet the basic principles of the Canada Health Act. The five principles are public administration, comprehensiveness, universality, portability, and accessibility. Abortion services fail at least 4 out 5 of these tests. (...) The federal government must step in and compel the provinces to fund all abortion services equally, whether in a clinic or hospital, and must ensure that all provinces cover abortion under their reciprocal billing arrangements. Provincial governments must ensure that enough hospitals perform abortions in all areas of the province, and that fully funded clinics are opened wherever feasible.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by remind:
There are NO abotion laws at all in Canada, it was just not decriminalized. And I believe access is guaranteed under the health act of Canada. Perhaps Joyce will make an appearance and clarify how this works and what can be done to assure access?

---

There was a law with strict measures regarding access to abortion that the Supreme Court struck down as unconstitutional. After teh court decision, no other law about abortion was introduced to replace it so there are presently no laws in place at the federal level.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dr. Hilarius:
There was a law with strict measures regarding access to abortion that the Supreme Court struck down as unconstitutional. After teh court decision, no other law about abortion was introduced to replace it so there are presently no laws in place at the federal level.

---

quote:

---

I think that technically, any province could choose to de-list it.

---

Wrong.

quote:

---

Abortion Is a "Medically Required" Service and Cannot be Delisted
The following arguments explain why all abortions are medically required and must be fully funded by provinces under the Canada Health Act, whether performed in hospitals or clinics.

---

Not going to argue/discuss any of this with you 2. Read this by Joyce as it pretty much covers everything.

quote:

---

The Canada Health Act (CHA) is our nation's federal health insurance legislation[1]. It establishes criteria and conditions for insured healthcare services, which provinces must meet in order to receive full cash contributions from the federal government. The CHA defines five basic principles to ensure reasonable access to health services for all Canadians without financial or other barriers: comprehensiveness, universality, portability, public administration, and accessibility[2].

The CHA says that provinces must insure all “medically necessary” services in “hospitals.” ...It is up to the provinces to decide what is medically necessary under the Canada Health Act. They generally do this by putting together a package of insured services, which are then automatically deemed medically necessary. In practice, however, politicians alone cannot decide what is medically necessary; the package of insured services must be negotiated between physicians and government. So even if a province wanted to take abortion off the list of insured services (called "delisting"), they would have to get the cooperation of a medical organization, usually the College of Physicians and Surgeons or the provincial chapter of the Canadian Medical Association.

---

http://www.prochoiceactionnetwork-canada.org/prochoicepress/02spring.shtml

quote:

---

Originally posted by HeywoodFloyd:
Congrats on your promotion Remind. It's about time you were made moderator of the FF.

---

quote:

---

Meanwhile, your source is still biased.

---

Congrats again on the promotion.

http://www.rabble.ca/babble/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic&f=15&t=001191

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michelle:
I think we're reaching a point on babble lately where every other thread is devolving the internet equivalent of screaming matches. Everyone jumping all over everyone. Roving vigilante-shadow-moderating by people who feel that they should be able to tell everyone what they're allowed to post and not allowed to post - and then turn around and tell people they don't like to stop telling other people what they can and can't post. It's incredible.

The tone this creates is terrible. And it's got to stop.

I think it's time for the shadow-moderators to start letting the actual moderators do their job. I know, everyone has a reason why THEIR shadow-moderating isn't really shadow-moderating. Everyone has a reason why THEY should be allowed to tell people to fuck off or call people trolls, even though they know it's against babble policy.

---

[ 08 April 2008: Message edited by: HeywoodFloyd ]

quote:

---

"Dr. Hilarius": ... many in Africa lack access to birth control and live in poverty and are hesitant to bring children into such conditions.

---

The opposite is true. Where there is poverty there is a higher birth rate. In fact, the highest fertility rates are found in those countries with the highest poverty.

Got any more lies? Using the moniker of a fake doctor seems like a perfect choice for you, Dr. H. And it's a useful warning to the rest of us. Thanks.

[ 08 April 2008: Message edited by: N.Beltov ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by N.Beltov:
The opposite is true. Where there is poverty there is a higher birth rate.

---

Because you viciously attacked "Dr. H" for her eminently sensible theory that abortion rates are lower in Europe than in Africa because, as she said, "many in Africa lack access to birth control and live in poverty and are hesitant to bring children into such conditions."

Saying that the "opposite is true" and pointing to the fact that poverty leads to higher birth rates is not an answer to that position. I just thought you might have a genuinely different explanation in there somewhere.

quote:

---

Originally posted by N.Beltov:
My disagreement was with what I understood as a claim that poverty would lead to a lower birth rate.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by N.Beltov:

The opposite is true. Where there is poverty there is a higher birth rate. In fact, the highest fertility rates are found in those countries with the highest poverty.

Got any more lies? Using the moniker of a fake doctor seems like a perfect choice for you, Dr. H. And it's a useful warning to the rest of us. Thanks.

[ 08 April 2008: Message edited by: N.Beltov ]

---

[ 09 April 2008: Message edited by: Michelle ]