Abortion: 2. Fetal status and legal representation

Bernard M Dickens

Canadian Medical Association Journal, CMAJ
Canadian Medical Association Journal

Extract
It has long been accepted that, legally, “personhood” begins with live birth and that a fetus therefore has no legal status. . . . generally, the rights of the fetus are not recognized, even though the property interests of an unborn child may appear to be protected. . . .This legal procedure simply postpones the distribution of property until the gestation period is over. Similarly, if a fetus is injured in utero and is subsequently found, when born alive, to be affected by the injury, legal action can be taken. However, this is the right of a human being, not of a fetus. . . . On the other hand, if a child is unborn or its life ends in utero, no legal action can be taken on its behalf. [quoting Dehler v. Ottawa Civic Hospital]. . . . [Discusses unresolved 1979 case in Nova Scotia in which an estranged husband and an anti-abortionist prevented an abortion using an injunction and guardianship application] . . . .It seems that Canadian society must rely on such judicial decisions to develop the law on fetal status, protection and legal representation. Politicians and legislatures are wary of the abortion-related furore these topics trigger.


Dickens BM. Abortion: 2. Fetal status and legal representation. Can Med Assoc J. 1981;124(3):253-254.

Abortion: 1. Definitions and implications

Bernard M Dickens

Canadian Medical Association Journal, CMAJ
Canadian Medical Association Journal

Summary
Discusses the difference between definitions in the Criminal Code and regulations promulgated by provincial authorities. Notes that post-coital interception (IUD or pharmaceuticals) may be considered abortions. “The problem may become more acute when ‘morning-after’ contraception and menstrual self-regulation with pills and suppositories become widely available. Recent legislation in New Zealand has established that pregnancy begins not with fertilization but with implantation.6 To keep legitimate contraception from coming under the abortion law in Canada we should make a similar provision. However, the recommendation made in August 1980 by the general council of the United Church of Canada – to decriminalize abortion within the first 20 weeks of pregnancy – may be the best solution.”


Dickens BM. Abortion: 1. Definitions and implications. Can Med Assoc J. 1981;124(2):113-114.

Correction

[CMAJ] An error appeared in the editorial by Dr. Bernard M. Dickens in the Jan. 15, 1980 issue of the Journal. The second sentence in the second column should read (with the correction in italics): “Furthermore, if the life of the unborn child is deliberately ended after labour begins but before it has an existence outside the mother’s body, the act is considered child destruction, which is lawlul when it is done to save the mother’s life (section 221 [2]).” We apologize to Dr. Dickens for this oversight.


Dickens BM. Abortion:1. Definitions and implications [correction]. Can Med Assoc J. 1981;124(7):854.

Abortion laws in Commonwealth countries

Rebecca J Cook, Bernard M Dickens

International Digest of Health Legislation
International Digest of Health Legislation

Extract
Conclusion

The objective of this Report has been to present a synthesis of Commonwealth abortion laws, and a synopsis of their lines of development. . .

The Report identifies factors that those planning change may need to consider, indicates how individual jurisdictions have responded to particular issues, and shows how certain laws have been found to operate.

. . .The ordering of national priorities is a function of government, which best discharges its duties by being sensitive to the spiritual and pragmatic aspirations of those it serves by leading. . .


Cook RJ, Dickens BM. Abortion laws in Commonwealth countries. Int Dig Health Leg. 1979;30(395-502.