\n

Over the past few years, \u201csafe access zone\u201d laws, also called bubble zone laws, have been passed in Ontario, Alberta, Nova Scotia, and Quebec, and currently there is private member\u2019s bill regarding this at the Manitoban legislature. Every time a province considers this issue, we\u2019ve let you know and asked you to write to your representative pointing out the concerns with this type of law.<\/p>\n

We are concerned about the ways these laws specifically ban pro-life speech. There are three restrictions that are particularly concerning in bubble zones, and I want to clarify those in more detail. I am using the Ontario legislation throughout; while other provinces\u2019 laws might vary slightly in wording, they are similar in substance.<\/p>\n

#1 Disapproval of abortion<\/h3>\n

Section 3(1)(c) While in bubble zone no person shall \u201cperform or attempt to perform an act of disapproval concerning issues related to abortion services.\u201d <\/em><\/p>\n

It is illegal to disapprove abortion near an abortion clinic. It\u2019s not about how you disapprove, but the act of disapproving itself is illegal. If it were about disapproving loudly, that could be regulated through something like a noise bylaw. If it were about preventing large protests, that could be regulated through restrictions on gathering size, as we are seeing in response to Covid-19. But this law is not concerned with the manner of communication at all. It\u2019s all about the message being communicated. You may approve of abortion, but disapproval is illegal.<\/p>\n

This means, for example, that two women could stand side by side outside an abortion clinic with signs \u2013 one saying \u201cI regret my abortion\u201d and the other saying \u201cI don\u2019t regret my abortion.\u201d Despite each being a statement of personal experience on the same topic, only the latter is legal. This prohibition isn\u2019t about protecting women\u2019s safety, or even peace of mind, but about preventing women from hearing anything other than full of approval of abortion.<\/p>\n

#2 Informing about abortion<\/h3>\n

Section 3(1)(b) While in a bubble zone no person shall \u201cinform or attempt to inform a person concerning issues related to abortion services.\u201d <\/em><\/p>\n

It is illegal to provide information.<\/p>\n

This is the most bizarre element of bubble zones laws. Why do we need to prohibit information? And not just misinformation; this law actually prohibits one person from informing another person about abortion. Why does a law purporting to guarantee women safe access to abortion require the suppression of information?<\/p>\n

Women seeking abortions are making complicated decisions based on the information they have. This information could come from what they learned school, what they\u2019ve heard from family members, what their friend said, what the abortionist tells them, what they read in the news, or what they saw online. The fact is we don\u2019t make decisions in a vacuum but based on the whole world around us, and an informed<\/em> choice requires information<\/em>.<\/p>\n

Every woman deserves to know the truth about abortion. Not just the truth about the actual procedure, but the truth about the humanity and corresponding human rights of her pre-born child. She is making a choice \u2013 she deserves to know what the choice entails. Silencing a dissenting voice doesn\u2019t increase a woman\u2019s autonomy or safety, it only decreases the information and potential support available to her.<\/p>\n

#3 Advising someone against abortion<\/h3>\n

While in a bubble zone no person shall \u201cadvise or persuade, or attempt to advise or persuade, a person to refrain from accessing abortion services.\u201d Section 3(1)(a).<\/em><\/p>\n

Notice again the one-way application: it\u2019s illegal to advise or persuade someone not to have an abortion, but there is no prohibition on persuading someone to have<\/em> an abortion. This is despite the number of women who report feeling pressured into having abortions.<\/p>\n

Persuading a woman to have an abortion is a serious issue. Some women are coerced. This is especially a concern for women being trafficked, who are sometimes forced to have an abortion by their pimp. It is also an issue of safety for minors who have been sexually assaulted, where abortion is used to cover up a crime. Some women face pressure from loved ones. Whether it\u2019s a partner threatening to leave or a parent threatening to kick her out of the home, there are many ways a woman can be wrongly persuaded into having an abortion, yet there is no law to criminalize this.<\/p>\n

Even without anyone actively pressuring her, a woman can feel like she has nowhere to go. Whether it\u2019s financial, social, or career-wise, some women feel like abortion is their only option. We are allowed to advise her to have an abortion, but we can\u2019t provide other options. We aren\u2019t allowed to talk to her to see if we can address her underlying concerns. We aren\u2019t allowed to let her know that there is support for her if she becomes a parent. A woman in that situation may well be making the hardest decision of her life \u2013 why are we not allowed to come alongside her?<\/p>\n

\u201cSafe access\u201d laws are not about promoting women\u2019s interests. They are about promoting abortion by preventing a woman from encountering the pro-life message at a time when she may need it the most. Anyone concerned about the lives of pre-born children and<\/em> the well-being of women, not to mention anyone who values freedom of expression, must oppose bubble zone laws.<\/p><\/div><\/div><\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"","protected":false},"author":3014,"featured_media":4547,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[281,61,284,280,322],"tags":[892,934,933,219,236,935,932],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/test.weneedalaw.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4546"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/test.weneedalaw.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/test.weneedalaw.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/test.weneedalaw.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3014"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/test.weneedalaw.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4546"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/test.weneedalaw.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4546\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4548,"href":"https:\/\/test.weneedalaw.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4546\/revisions\/4548"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/test.weneedalaw.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/4547"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/test.weneedalaw.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4546"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/test.weneedalaw.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4546"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/test.weneedalaw.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4546"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}