Abortion Debate Revisits Carleton Campus
By Gudrun Schultz

Carleton Lifeline hosted a panel discussion on abortion March 20, on the current legal status of abortion in Canada, the first official action of the newly-ratified campus pro-life group.
           
The event was held to clarify misconceptions about abortion law in Canada, said Sarah Fletcher, president of Lifeline, in particular addressing the inaccurate claim that the Constitution has established a woman’s right to have an abortion.
           
“A constitutional right to abortion does not exist in Canadian law,” said panelist Dr. Janet Epp Buckingham, legal expert and director of the Laurentian Leadership Centre in Ottawa and formerly the director of Law and Public Policy with the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada. “In fact the government’s legitimate interest in protecting the rights of the unborn has been clearly established in court rulings.”
           
Along with Dr. Buckingham, the panel featured pro-life MPs Maurice Vellacott and Tom Wappel, and pro-life leader and nurse Maureen Farnand. A fifth panel member, Liberal MP Paul Steckle, was unable to attend.
           
Dr. Buckingham identified three areas of immediate concern in the legal climate surrounding abortion issues. At the forefront, she raised concerns over the emerging legal trend stating the existence of a constitutional “right” to abortion, which she said was “disturbing, alarming and false.”
The 1988 Supreme Court ruling that struck down the Canadian abortion law clearly stated that there was a legitimate government interest in protection of the unborn, she stated. All three judgments written in the ruling said the state had a legitimate right to ensure protection of the unborn.
           
“Believing the statement that Morgentaler’s [1988 Supreme Court] case established a constitutional right to abortion is like the old saying, ‘If you say a lie often enough, it becomes the truth,’” said Liberal MP Tom Wappel of Scarborough South.
           
Also of great legal concern is the current lack of any informed consent requirements before obtaining an abortion. “Any other medical procedure requires full informed consent prior to the procedure, except abortion,” Dr. Buckingham said, anticipating a massive lawsuit over the issue in the near future.
           
According to panelist Maureen Farnand, abortion complications are considered “inevitable” in much of the medical community. Among some of the more common side effects to abortion, she listed pelvic inflammatory disease, lacerations to the uterus, hemorrhage and psychiatric problems, along with an increased risk of breast cancer and subsequent premature births.
           
In addition to denying women the opportunity to make a fully informed decision about obtaining an abortion, Dr. Buckingham identified a disturbing trend in the medical community to force medical professionals to participate in abortion.
           
“Medical schools are telling students that they must participate in abortion—conscientious objections are not being respected,” said Dr. Buckingham. “I see it as a worrying trend to limit speech on significant issues. It’s anti-democratic, contrary to human rights, contrary to the Charter.”
           
She made reference to the recent Saskatchewan case of pro-life nurse Bill Whatcott, suspended from nursing by the Nurses Association and fined $15,000 after he demonstrated outside of a Regina Planned Parenthood abortion clinic.
Maurice Vellacott, a Conservative MP for the Saskatoon-Wanuskewin riding, said that while universities often avoid discussions on abortion, debate on the issue should not be shut down.
           
"Possibly because of political correctness in society [these debates] are not happening on campuses to the degree they should but certainly I think these topics should be engaged in academic institutions," Vellacot said.
           
Wappel agreed, saying, “Free discussion needs to begin in Canadian universities. Here you are supposed to be able to explore ideas, establish criterion for your opinions, and take formed ideas out into your professions.”
           
“The last place these discussions are held is the first place they should be—the institutions of higher learning.”
           
Although the Carleton University Students’ Association voted in November to ban all “anti-choice” groups from campus, Lifeline was granted official club status in January 2007, a decision that appeared to contradict the new and controversial student policy. It remained unclear, however, what restrictions would be placed on the club’s campus activities. While the group was not prevented from holding the panel discussion, they were denied access to key locations for posters advertising the event. Students made up a handful of the 38 audience members.

Gudrun Schultz is editor for LifeCanada News.