Joyce Arthur of the Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada answers Ken Epp in a pdf downloadable at ARCC titled ‘Bill C-484 Endangers Abortion Rights and Women’s Rights by Establishing Fetal Personhood: A Rebuttal to Ken Epp’. (Here is what she is rebutting.)
Here’s her conclusion:
Regardless of Ken Epp’s stated intent for the bill – to protect pregnant women and wanted fetuses from violence – he should realize that once enacted, his bill can be used in ways he did not intend. Epp claims that his bill was vetted by lawyers who pronounced it constitutionally sound, but most other lawyers seem to disagree. His bill collides not only with the Criminal Code definition of “human being,” it flies in the face of several Supreme Court of Canada rulings that said fetuses cannot be persons, that a pregnant woman and her fetus are “physically one” person, and that all rights must accrue to the pregnant woman because she already has established constitutional and equality rights.
We all want to protect and value life, but it should be done in a way that values the women who bring that life into the world. By focusing on fetuses, not injured pregnant women, Bill C-484 is offensive to the full humanity of all women, not just pregnant women. It is a radical bill that positions the fetus as a woman’s co-equal. By recognizing the “rights of the unborn,” it creates the risk that pregnant women’s behaviour could be regulated or punished, and abortion rights restricted. Therefore, Bill C-484 has profound and troubling implications for the health, rights, and independence of all women. It must not be allowed to become law.
South Carolina is the jurisdiction that has been most enthusiastic in criminalizing pregnant women’s behaviour. In timely fashion, last week The New York Times reports on the case of the first woman convicted in South Carolina. The state Supreme Court has overturned her conviction.
Here’s what Stop the Drug War had to say on the matter:
McKnight was arrested in 1999, several months after she experienced a stillbirth at Conway Hospital. She was convicted of homicide by child abuse in 2001 after a jury bought scientifically unsupported arguments that her cocaine use caused the stillbirth. Although McKnight had no prior conviction, and even prosecutors agreed she had no intention of harming the fetus, she was sentenced to 12 years in prison with no chance of parole.
McKnight unsuccessfully appealed her conviction in 2002, challenging the constitutionality of using murder statutes to prosecute women who experience stillbirths. But in a split decision, the state Supreme Court upheld her conviction, offering a novel interpretation of the state’s homicide laws. The court held that any woman who unintentionally heightens the risk of a stillbirth could be found guilty of homicide with “extreme indifference to human life.” Under this doctrine, the court held, any pregnant woman who engages in activity “potentially fatal” to her fetus could be charged with murder.
McKnight and her attorneys appealed to the US Supreme Court, but that body declined to review the decision.
In Monday’s decision, the state Supreme Court focused on whether McKnight got a fair trial. It found that she did not. McKnight’s trial counsel, an overworked public defender, was “ineffective in her preparation of McKnight’s defense through expert testimony and cross-examination,” the court found. The court also found that the information given to the jury about the supposed link between McKnight’s cocaine use and her stillbirth was not scientifically supported.
So, where do matters stand for Ms McKnight?
McKnight is not out of the woods yet. Her case has been remanded for retrial, but prosecutors have so far given no indication whether they will proceed. In the meantime, she remains in prison awaiting a hearing on bail pending her new trial.
Ms McKnight’s nightmare has been going on for nine years.
Do we want a ‘fetal homicide’ law in Canada? A law that can be manipulated and interpreted in ‘novel’ ways by fetus fetishizing and/or misogynist cops, prosecutors, and judges?
Why not simply amend the Criminal Code to allow judges to impose harsher sentences for assaults on pregnant women as private member’s bill C-543 proposes?
Visit our Activist Page to find out more about Ken Epp’s sneaky backdoor attack on women’s rights and how to fight it.
Recent Comments