Get the feed!
Fetus bill rekindles abortion debate
Read the article / show / issue that provoked me to write a letter and my response below that or go straight to my response
Date Posted on this Site
January 6, 2008
Publication
Kingston Whig-Standard
Publication Date
January 4, 2008
Published Content
Kathleen Harris
Some MPs are rallying support for a proposed law that would make it a crime to kill or injure an unborn child after a Winnipeg woman, who was eight months pregnant, was shot to death.
Conservative MP Ken Epp, who recently tabled a private member's bill C- 484 called the "Unborn Victims of Crime Act," said the legislation would create a new offence in the Criminal Code. The bill addresses a "huge gap" in law when a violent act is perpetrated against a woman who has chosen to carry the fetus to term, he said.
"This is a case when the woman has decided to have that child, and that choice has to be protected in law," Epp said in an interview. "I've made no secret of the fact that I'm pro-life. But this bill goes very narrowly at one issue - where the woman has made the choice to have the child, and that choice is taken away unilaterally, without her consent and usually with violence."
Epp's bill comes in the wake of two high-profile cases in his home province of Alberta and another in Toronto last October. Aysun Sesen, 25, died from multiple stab wounds to her upper body in an attack that also killed her seven- month-old fetus.
Past attempts at similar legislation have been rejected due to constitutional concerns, yet Epp insists his bill makes it clear that elective abortion would remain legal while allowing a criminal charge for the death or injury of an unborn child harmed during an act of violence against the expectant mother.
Opponents decry the bill as a thinly veiled attempt to reopen the contentious and emotional abortion debate. Carolyn Egan, a spokeswoman for the Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada, said the proposed law is a roundabout way of restricting hard-fought women's rights.
"It could be a slippery slope, bringing us to the point where fetuses could be considered persons and therefore having an effect on a woman's right to abortion in Canada," she said.
Rather than granting the fetus personhood, Egan suggested a more appropriate way of dealing with such a serious crime is for the courts to impose a stiffer sentence for the perpetrator when the victim is pregnant.
MPs are expected to vote next on the bill in early March.
My Response Letter
In a sad attempt to undermine a bill to protect unborn victims of crime, Abortion Rights Coalition spokesperson Carolyn Egan told a reporter that "rather than granting the fetus personhood, a more appropriate way of dealing with such a serious crime is for the courts to impose a stiffer sentence for the perpetrator when the victim is pregnant."
If the fetus is not a person and just a blob of cells, why should the courts be allowed to impose a harsher sentence against the offender? Do we give offenders harsher sentences when the victim had long hair that she cherished or a well-groomed beard that was a source of much pride?
Ms. Egan is unintentionally acknowledging an obvious truth: fetuses are human beings.
Jason Gennaro
Was my response published?
No