Except, there is an inconsistency in when science matters and when it doesn’t. When discussing human life, and the genesis of each human being, science is completely ignored and that includes the possible experience of pain a fetus may feel during the abortion procedure.

In Europe, restrictions on abortion after 12 weeks’ gestation are common and accepted, and, as such, fetal pain is addressed much differently than in Canada or the United States. In North America, many people come from a perspective of fear, where any consideration given to a fetus is viewed as an attack on women’s rights.

Studies from India and the United Kingdom refer to the rising demand for fetal surgery, and the “considerable evidence that the fetus may experience pain” leads to the uncomplicated conclusion that the right types and doses of anesthetic need to be determined for various procedures. It is clear that anesthesiologists require specialized training to address the needs of pregnant women and their pre-born children.

Multiple studies have shown that even babies who are not yet viable (before 20-24 weeks) exhibit consistent, measurable stress responses to pain. While many still debate the brain science behind this, a study out of the UK says these reactions themselves are enough to result in “a moral obligation to provide fetal anaesthesia and analgesia.”  It has also been shown and attested to by multiple doctors specializing in the field of fetal surgery that “pain and stress may affect fetal survival and neurodevelopment.”

A study from Belgium admits that providing anesthesia prenatally presents a challenge, both from the perspective of its questionable necessity as well as dosage considerations. Still, recognizing the delicate balance when both mother and child need to be taken into account is fundamentally different from the Canadian question of whether both need to be taken into account.

Kirti Saxena, published in the Indian Journal of Anesthesia, states, “After surgery there are two patients to be cared for, and a second operating room should be available in case further surgery is needed in the neonate.”

As science and medicine continue to advance, fetal surgeries will become more common. Increased prenatal testing and diagnosis may lead to increased abortions, but seem just as likely to lead to increased demand for reliable fetal surgeries to give children their best chance at life.

In Canada, we need to follow the lead of our European counterparts, where fetal surgery and fetal anesthetic are inextricably linked, and where the humanity of the second patient is assumed, not demonized. This will allow fetal surgery as a field to improve and develop to become another support system for women.  Our laws need to reflect the humanity of the second patient in fetal surgeries, honouring the mothers who choose to give their babies a chance as well as the doctors who pour their talents into such tiny, fragile patients.

This article was written by Anna Nienhuis, Research and Communications Coordinator for WeNeedaLAW.ca. It first appeared in LifeCanada’s Reflections Magazine and is reprinted with permission.

Schuyler’s comments come as Degrassi is set to air its third season. In it they will confront abortion, refugees, and “scary right-wing thinking.” In an episode called #IRegretNothing Lola Pacini, a 16-year old character on the show, will be featured having an abortion. Victoria Ahearn of the Canadian Press interviewed Schuyler who is quoted as saying, “We’re very much influenced by what’s going on in the world, there’s no question.” This would lead the reader to believe that the only reason they include such a “divisive topic” on their show is because of what’s going on in the world – as though 16-year old girls are publicly celebrating their abortions all the time – and they are only catching up.   Except that’s not really what’s going on. Amanda Arcuri who plays Lolo Pacini in the show told Ms. Ahearn that, “I’m happy that the writers gave me this opportunity to portray it [abortion] and help young girls.” Degrassi’s producers are clearly trying to destigmatize abortion and normalize it for teens.

In spite of Degrassi and the efforts of other abortion advocates to portray abortion as something to celebrate we can be sure that it will always remain divisive. This is not because of “right-wing, scary thinking” but rather, because of the scientific reality that abortion takes the life of a human being, and that abortion is contrary to the created order in which a mother’s natural instinct is to care for her young.

The pro-life response to Degrassi’s ploy is not to demonize the show or its characters but to continue displaying the humanity of the pre-born child and doing everything we can to build support for laws that protect them.

This intense case raises major questions about the humanity of the pre-born child. In Canada, a child becomes legally recognized as such when it emerges from its mother’s womb. Section 223 (1) of the Criminal Code reads as follows:

• A child becomes a human being within the meaning of this Act when it has completely proceeded, in a living state, from the body of its mother, whether or not

(a) it has breathed;

(b) it has an independent circulation; or

(c) the navel string is severed.

Lynlee’s head was carefully maintained inside the uterus during the operation in order to prevent the uterus from thinking the pregnancy was over, so under Canadian law she did not “completely proceed” from the womb.  However, it is clear that Lynlee Boemer was a person during her surgery. Otherwise what on earth were the surgeons operating on and striving to save? A clump of disposable cells? Certainly not. And when she was replaced in her mother’s womb, then, did that right to personhood disappear along with the physical sight of her? Could her mother have chosen an abortion after that point? And if not, if her legal right to personhood and life remained, what makes her different than any other baby at 23-weeks gestation?

These are questions abortion supporters don’t want to ask, and don’t want to answer. Even the staunchest defender of a “woman’s right to choose” gets squeamish in the face of a living baby operated on outside its mother’s body and then placed back in. And so they should – there is no clearer evidence of the humanity of the pre-born child apart from its mother’s body.  “Her body, her choice” distracts from the truth that the child may be in the mother’s body, but it is not her body. A separate, growing body, with unique human DNA was in this case being killed by a tumor leaching her vital blood supply – a tumor that was not affecting the mother’s health.

How long can abortion defenders use the “her body, her choice” rhetoric in the face of this unrelenting scientific evidence? We may be thankful that doctors such as the fetal specialists in this case recognize the value of pre-born children and are willing to use their talents and knowledge to save them. When abortion is not an option, extraordinary, beautiful things can happen.

Most health jurisdictions around the world have legislation that protects vulnerable minors by enacting parental consent for abortion legislation, including 39 of the 51 states just south of us. As stated in our recently released legal opinion:

“Beyond healthcare, age restrictions are used to determine when a person can vote, drive, sell property, stop attending school, consent to sex and marry.  All of these restrictions all have some element of a literal arbitrariness but this does not automatically invalidate them, and in fact, they are a common and necessary was of ordering our society.  Some of these also have a parental consent component.  For example, youth under 18 years of age who wish to marry.    Like abortion, marriage carries with it potentially serious consequences and implications.  Yet choosing to marry is a reversible decision.  Abortion is not.”

Requiring parental consent for abortion is not only good for the health and well-being of adolescents, it also saves the lives of pre-born children. This week marks the 25th anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court decision upholding Minnesota’s parental notification requirement and in that time period abortions performed on minors has dropped an astounding 79%! See here for more on the impact of Minnesota’s parental laws.

Parental consent does not equal parental control – it is about responsibility and care.  A parental consent law makes it clear that the government supports young women as well as the lives they may carry, and is working to enhance their well-being now and across their lifespan.

In a free and democratic society, organized rallies and protest are part of the political process. In a nation where every citizen has a voice in electing their representative, where every citizen can contribute to the public policy debate, and where every citizen can independently lobby for change, protests play a legitimate role. Protests are not inherently anarchist or anti-government. When done legally, in a peaceful and organized fashion, protests are a means of engaging with the elected leadership on an issue, demonstrating to them that many citizens care deeply about this particular issue and that they expect change.

André goes on to write,

Also, a distinction could be made between protesting for others, over protesting for our own individual interests. There is definitely a Christian obligation for the former over the latter. This is borne out in the command to love one’s neighbour as oneself, and to be our brother’s keeper. Turning the cheek applies to personal insult and persecution, and not to persecution of others. We need to stand up for our neighbours, including the pre-born ones.

And so this week thousands of Christians will be marching with many other concerned citizens in Ottawa and capital cities throughout the country. The 2015 March for Life, like all other years is a peaceful protest to the stark, and vulgar reality that our pre-born neighbours have no legal protection throughout the entire period of pre-natal development. This year there will also be specific focus on the recent legalization of euthanasia and assisted suicide as a result of the Supreme Court ruling a few months ago.

Concerning pre-born human rights Canada’s courts have consistently referred to abortion as medically necessary. But, no court – at any level – has excluded the possibility of governments (provincial or federal) from regulating abortion. In fact, in the most famous case dealing with abortion, R. v. Morgentaler [1988], the Supreme Court was nearly emphatic that while the abortion regulations at the time were found to be unconstitutional, Parliament had a duty to enact new laws that were both constitutional and protected the fetus at some point.

In several provinces there is a specific focus at 2015 March for Life events to build support for parental consent or notification laws. It is unfortunate that many choice-focused individuals and organizations take a fundamentally flawed approach to the issue of parental consent for abortion. They frame the problem as, “Choice and bodily autonomy at all costs and anyone who opposes that opposes women’s rights.” Unfortunately, this “at all costs” approach harms the very women it sets out to protect, especially when it is applied to adolescents making decisions on whether to continue a pregnancy.

Nationally there is a continuing push for laws which address gendercide or sex-selective abortion as well as the more recent building of support for a pre-born victims of crime law. These both will receive attention at the National March for Life in Ottawa.

Canada has a long ways to go in regards to implementing abortion regulations which are already in place in all other democratic nations. The virtue of perseverance is something we pray for daily as we work to advance pre-born human rights both federally and provincially.

The March for Life is an opportunity to respond to the call of Proverbs 24:

“Rescue those being led away to death; hold back those staggering toward the slaughter. If you say, “But we knew nothing about this,” does not he who weighs the heart perceive it? Does not he who guards your life know it? Will he not repay each person according to what he has done?”

We know what abortion is and what it does. For those Christians who are hesitant to join in peaceful protest – or even militantly opposed – it must be said that God is not simply suggesting that we get involved, he is ordering us to do something! If not, we risk serious consequences. Let your March for Life experience be a springboard to year-round activism as, in God’s strength, we do everything possible to protect all those created in His image.

Confidentiality, first of all has proven to be of crucial importance in getting adolescents to use health care, particularly with regards to reproductive issues [1]. This is obviously not, however, a fact unique to adolescents, though it is certainly portrayed that way. Interestingly, the Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada references an American privacy law (HIPAA) as an example of why confidentiality is crucial and parents should not be informed if their daughter chooses an abortion. That law, however, specifically mentions abortion in the context that an adolescent minor (under 18) may only maintain confidentiality in cases “when a minor has requested and received court approval to have an abortion without parental consent or notification” (emphasis added) [1]. It is grouped with HIV/AIDS and sexually transmitted infections in that patient confidentiality may be maintained following court consent, but treatment or action cannot occur without adult consent. Further, confidentiality is not broken in that parents are told in secret. Adolescents are made aware of the requirement and informed of the need for parental consent before contact is made, and given the knowledge that they have the opportunity to seek court consent instead if necessary.

Access to health care, then, is the other major consideration.  Such access can actually be improved by a parental consent law.  It can be very difficult for adolescents to navigate the health care system on their own, from making appointments to transportation to appointments to accessing the follow-up care they may need.  Absences from school or home will need to be explained, and the stress of dealing with pregnancy alone is obviously significant for an adolescent.  Studies show that adolescents often know later in their pregnancy that they have conceived, or at least do not seek medical attention until they are “beyond facilities’ gestational age limits”. [2] While Canada has no laws restricting abortion, most doctors will only perform abortions before the 20 week mark, as after this point the fetus is considered viable. If the adolescent does present early enough for a drug-induced medical abortion, the complication and failure rates are higher than for surgically-induced abortion, so parental involvement and care can be very valuable [3].

An adolescent who gets an abortion in secret is more likely to hide her pain and complications following the procedure, putting her health at risk, and parents will not know to watch for signs of physical or psychological struggling. Studies have found a significantly higher rate (3-6x) of suicide in 15-24 year olds following induced abortions when compared to those who are not pregnant or who chose childbirth when pregnant, as well as decreased self-esteem and feelings of guilt, fear and confusion over what occurred [4-7]. A review of the literature from 1995-2011 found that pregnancy loss, including through abortion, carries a higher risk of subsequent mental disorder than childbirth. Thirteen studies showed a clearly higher risk for the abortion group versus those who chose childbirth, while only 5 studies found no difference [8].

The Canadian Medical Association, in its official policy on induced abortion, stresses the need for full and immediate counselling services for patients in the case of an unwanted pregnancy.  This is much easier to ensure and maintain with parental consent requirements in place [9]. Helping or encouraging adolescents to keep their pregnancies and abortions secret is helping them isolate themselves at a particularly vulnerable time, at an age where their coping mechanisms are not yet well-developed. That doesn’t sound like a consideration of best interests at all.

We must briefly consider the concern that is sure to be raised in dramatic fashion almost immediately.  Is there the possibility that parental consent requirements will drive some adolescents to self-harm or illegal means of obtaining abortions in an effort to avoid telling their parents, or the now-infamous “coat hanger argument”? This common rhetoric has always held true for a small, sensationalized minority of cases, and will continue to do so. Desperate young women, like desperate older women, will take desperate measures. This does not, however, negate the need for a parental consent law with all its potential benefits for the majority.  Rather than abandon parental consent, we should instead focus on alternate front-line support for these women who feel their situation is so dire they cannot possibly share the news of a pregnancy with a parent or guardian.

In terms of decision-making and consent, the terms mature or immature are not meant as a comment on an adolescents’ character or intellect, but rather as a scientific reality in terms of brain development. Not only are adolescents likely to make their pregnancy-related decisions in a state of stress, emotion, and exhaustion, they are also doing so with a less-developed prefrontal cortex than an adult, one of the “key ways the brain doesn’t look like that of an adult until the early 20s” [10]. Adolescent brains show marked differences not in intellectual ability compared to adults, but in areas of impulse control and planning for the future.  Those last-to-develop capacities are critical to making an informed decision on parenthood. These abilities are accessible in their parents, who can assist them in reasoning through a decision beyond the emotional basis, and beyond what peers are capable of.

In addition to the incomplete brain development of adolescents, there are marked hormonal shifts occurring in adolescence.  These shifts affect the intensity with which emotion is felt as well as stress levels. Add to that the hormonal shifts that come with pregnancy and you have a dangerous decision-making cocktail which, like many cocktails, will lead to regretted decisions.

The argument put forward regarding adolescents needing consent to continue with a pregnancy should be dismissed without further consideration.  Just as parental consent is needed for any surgery, so it should be needed for abortion at any stage of pregnancy – we do not ask for parental consent for an adolescent to get appendicitis or cancer, we simply involve them in helping their child cope with the consequences. As stated in R. v. Morgentaler, abortion is not a right, and should not be treated as such [12].

Parental consent does not equal parental control – it is about responsibility and care. Parents can share their reasoning and attempt to influence the decision, but the main goal is to provide support for pregnant adolescents regardless of the outcome of their pregnancy.

Sources:

1 English, A. & Ford, C. (2004). The HIPAA privacy rule and adolescents: Legal questions and clinical challenges. Perspectives on Sexual & Reproductive Health, 36 (2)

2 Dobkin, L., Perucci A. & Dehlendorf, C. (2013). Pregnancy options counseling for adolescents: Overcoming barriers to care and preserving preference. Adolescent Pregnancy, 43 (4), 96-102.

3 Lanfranch, A., Gentles, I. & Ring-Cassidy, E. (2013). Complications: Abortion’s Impact on Women. The deVeber Institute for Bioethics and Social Research, ON, Canada.

4 Ely, G., Flaherty, C. & Cuddeback, G. (2010). The relationship between depression and other psychosocial problems in a sample of adolescent pregnancy termination patients. Child & Adolescent Social Work Journal, 27 (4) 269-282.

5 Gissler, M., Hemminki, E., Lonnqvist, J. (1996). Suicides after pregnancy in Finland, 1987–94: register linkage study. BMJ 313: 1431.

6 Curley, M. & Johnston, C. (2013). The characteristics and severity of psychological distress after abortion among university students. Journal of Behavioral Services & Research, 40 (3), 279-293.

7 Humphrey, M., Colditz, P., Flenady, V. & Whelan, N. (2013) Maternal and Perinatal Mortality and Morbidity in Queensland Queensland Maternal and Perinatal Quality Council Report 2013. State of Queensland (Department of Health). Retrieved from http://www.health.qld.gov.au/caru/networks/docs/qmoqc-report-2013-full.pdf

8 Bellieni, C. & Buonocore, G. (2013). Abortion and subsequent mental health: Review of the literature. Psychiatry & Clinical Neurosciences, 67 (5), 301-310.

9 CMA Policy: Induced Abortion. http://policybase.cma.ca/dbtw-wpd/PolicyPDF/PD88-06.pdf

10 The teen brain: Still under construction. http://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/publications/the-teen-brain-still-under-construction/index.shtml

11 Canadian Medical Association, Code of Ethics, 2004. https://www.cma.ca/Assets/assets-library/document/en/advocacy/policy-research/CMA_Policy_Code_of_ethics_of_the_Canadian_Medical_Association_Update_2004_PD04-06-e.pdf

12 R. v. Morgentaler (1988) 1 SCR 30, 1988 CanLII 90 (SCC). Retrieved from https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/1988/1988canlii90/1988canlii90.html?searchUrlHash=AAAAAQAZcGFyZW50YWwgY29uc2VudCBhYm9ydGlvbgAAAAAB&resultIndex=1

The latest example comes from our neighbours to the south where Carafem, a new abortion clinic in Washington, DC is seeking to break down the stigma surrounding abortion by offering a ‘spa-like’ experience to all its customers. Has it really come down to this? Apparently it’s the choice of flooring and upholstery that is a barrier for women who feel that abortion is the only choice they have? While it remains to be seen as to how many more women Carafem can attract to their facility with this new marketing ploy what is perhaps more disturbing is the fact that abortion advocates continue to disregard the often times serious psychological problems caused by abortion.

Every year approximately 100,000 Canadian women walk into a clinic or hospital in order to abort their pre-born child. The reasons are varied but the results are the same; the life of a human being with inherent dignity is ended. For many women there is considerable regret after having an abortion. The psychological impact of abortion cannot be minimized. Studies vary and some put the increase in mental health problems as high as 81% when comparing women who had an abortion with those who did not.[1] This reality has become problematic for abortion advocates and if Carafem’s stunt is any indication they aren’t willing to address the root cause of regret.

Some of the most prolific apologists for pre-born human rights are the very people who have been mostly deeply affected by abortion; women who have regretted their abortion.

Regret is a major obstacle for the pro-choice movement in foisting their ideology on Canadians. In fact last year at an international conference on Prince Edward Island the majority of speakers spoke of the need to “normalize” abortion as a response to this obstacle.

Herein lies the hypocrisy of the pro-choice movement. The feelings a women has had after killing her baby are real and justified. No matter what the décor is the regret will still be there. But instead of working to minimize the need for abortion (and thereby reducing the regret) abortion advocates are attempting to normalize it – with attractive floor coverings and comfy chairs.

The Asheville Citizen is reporting that a North Carolina man has been charged with first-degree murder in the deaths of a Cristie Codd, a finalist from the TV show Food Network Star and her husband. Ms. Codd was pregnant at the time of her death. It is unclear from news reports how many weeks pregnant she was. But because North Carolina has a fetal homicide law that makes it a crime to unlawfully kill a pre-born child at any stage of development the police have laid an additional charge for the murder of the Codd’s pre-born child.

In another tragic news story, this one even more disturbing, a Colorado woman was stabbed in the abdomen and her pre-born child ripped from her womb. The woman, who was seven months pregnant at the time of the vicious attack is expected to survive, but her pre-born child did not. The State of Colorado allows for pregnancy to be considered an aggravating factor for sentencing a convicted offender but unlike North Carolina, it does not recognize the pre-born child as a separate victim. Boulder County District Attorney Stan Garnett said his office is still considering what formal charges should be filed against the suspect. “The issues involving an unborn child are complicated under Colorado law,” he said. “In most circumstances, if a child was not actually born alive, then homicide charges are not possible.”

In the past ten years there are countless Canadian tragedies which are eerily similar to the ones described above. Yet, because there is no recognition in law of children before birth – even for those children a woman has chosen to carry to term – justice is denied when it is needed most.

This legal void is a result of culture fixated on the right to abortion even though pre-born victims of crime legislation has nothing to do with abortion. Abortion is legal in Canada throughout the entire nine months of pregnancy for any reason. A pre-born victims law would not change this. The current reality is that when a pregnant woman is attacked and her assailant causes harm or kills her pre-born child, no charge can be laid in the death of the woman’s child, even if the sole purpose of the attacker was to kill her child.

Unfortunately, even though a majority of Canadians want this injustice corrected, a pre-born victims law is only discussed when tragedy strikes. I’ve written here before about the loss experienced by the Kaake (pronounced “cake”) family in Windsor, Ontario when their daughter Cassandra was brutally murdered along with her pre-born daughter Molly. Thanks to the courage and tenacity of the Kaake family they are pursuing justice for Molly and her peers. They have launched a national written petition drive to build support for a change in the law that would see pre-born children treated as a separate victim when a crime is perpetrated against a pregnant woman.

There are far too many politicians who willfully paralyze themselves when they should be enacting just laws that address these injustices and as a result real life consequences are felt by already grieving individuals and families. Even though it is unlikely the Kaake family will see justice for Molly if all Canadians get on board with their efforts politicians will not be able to ignore this issue any longer. And God willing, no family will need to experience the same lack of justice ever again.

Why are abortion facilities closing? As LifeNews.com reports,

• “The enactment and enforcement of new state laws.
• Increased reporting by pro-life activists of incompetent and/or criminal behavior committed by abortionists.
• Financial struggles within the abortion cartel due to decreased demand for abortions.
• The retirement of abortionists who are not replaced.”

Operation Rescue (OR) is a pro-life organization that maintains a listing of abortion facilities and tracks clinic closures. OR President, Troy Newman, says “We are continuing to witness the implosion of the abortion cartel in America. The only things that are preventing total collapse are court injunctions that are blocking several state abortion safety laws from being enforced. Once those laws clear the courts, we expect to see even more dangerous abortion facilities close. This is great news for women and babies because when abortion clinics close, lives are saved.”

“As abortion facilities continue to close, abortion numbers continue to fall. While national abortion numbers remain incomplete, the average number of abortions decreases by about 3% annually. However, state statistics show that the drop in abortions that is more pronounced in areas where there are abortion clinic closures.”

This is encouraging news, there is a decreased demand for abortions. We wrote about that earlier when we showed that abortion regulations improve maternal health outcomes. The truth is, less women are demanding abortions and more women are getting the help they need, now that’s what we call good healthcare!

The above statement was said by a father in Winnipeg (read article here). Do you think he was talking about abortion? No, he was talking about a belly button piercing. This Winnipeg couple is angry that their 16 year old daughter was able to obtain a piercing without their consent and, we believe, rightly so.

The teenager’s father goes on to say “We’re not mad at our daughter. We trust and believe this was a 16-year-old who made a decision. We wanted to be there to help make that decision.”

That is what parenting is about, it’s about helping our children make decisions because they have been entrusted to our care and as parents or legal guardians, we have the responsibility to help them make decisions – whether about a body piercing, or a life-altering decision such as an abortion procedure.

We believe that a parent is in the best position to support their child when facing an unplanned pregnancy and if children are having abortions and being counseled on how keep it a secret from their parents, how do we expect parents to carry out their responsibilities to love, nurture and protect their children?

For more information about our Parental Consent campaign, currently running in Saskatchewan, please visit sk.parentalconsent.ca