Ken Epp, sponsor of the BillC-484, the Unborn Victims of Crime Act, has been busy. Huge portions of his website are devoted to defending this private members bill, and he has composed a report defending it against the accusations made by people like Joyce Arthur. A recent Ottawa Citizen column by Mr. Epp is here, and here is the report.
I can't speak particularly effectively to most of the arguments he makes (short version: C-484 is not like any of those nasty U.S. Fetal Homicide Laws). If anyone else wants to, or to just blow off some estrogen, go ahead in the comments. But what I would be especially interested in is if anyone has considered the risk the bill would might pose for abortion providers (rather than pregnant women)?
C-484 refers to harm caused to the woman by a "third party" committing an offense against the unborn child by virtue of committing an offense against the woman. And whether or not an offense against the woman has been committed depends on whether the act was "against her will".
Could a woman decide retroactively that her abortion was carried out "against her will" and attempt to bring charges against her doctor?
You do read about this sort of thing on Lifesite: My Doctor Drugged Me And Took My Baby etc.
Update: Liberal MP Brent St. Denis has now introduced Bill C-543, intended to "counter" C-484 and fill in some of its loop-holes.
As far as I know, forced abortion would be illegal as it stands now. C-484 would not change the situation.
ReplyDeleteAbortion and any medical act committed in good faith is specifically excluded from prosecution in the act.
Forced abortions do happen. They're almost never prosecuted but they do happen.