Fetal rights: Supreme Court tosses ball back in Parliament’s court

Eike-Henner Kluge

Canadian Medical Association Journal, CMAJ
Canadian Medical Association Journal

Extract
The case is of interest to doctors, but not because it deals with midwifery and its legality in Canada – the Supreme Court decision is silent on that point. At issue was the status of the human fetus: Is a full-term human fetus that is partially born a person in the eyes of the criminal law? The court decided it is not. . . . The Supreme Court has decided this case on very narrow legal grounds and it has carefully avoided coming to grips with the issue of whether a fetus is a person in the eyes of the law. This is not surprising. On several occasions, such as cases involving Morgentaler5 and Daigle,6 the Supreme Court has made clear that the status of the fetus should not be resolved in court – the court is not prepared to do Parliament’s work.


Kluge E-H. Fetal rights: Supreme Court tosses ball back in Parliament’s court. Can Med Assoc J. 1991 May 01;144(9):1154-1155.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *