Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Next revision | Previous revision | ||
| utsfl:classroom:seminars:pbp201h [2020/08/13 19:00] – created with WNAL materials balleyne | utsfl:classroom:seminars:pbp201h [2021/03/20 10:36] (current) – balleyne | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
| We're going to look at incremental federal and provincial policies, and also both the supply and demand side of the abortion equation, as attainable next steps to reduce the abortion rate on the way to upholding human rights for all human beings. | We're going to look at incremental federal and provincial policies, and also both the supply and demand side of the abortion equation, as attainable next steps to reduce the abortion rate on the way to upholding human rights for all human beings. | ||
| - | Sidenote: Why incremental legislation? | + | ===== Supply Side Policies (Restricting Abortion) |
| - | {{youtube> | + | |
| - | + | ||
| - | ===== Supply Side Policies (Restricting Abortion) ===== | + | |
| ==== Federal ==== | ==== Federal ==== | ||
| WeNeedALaw has identified three key federal initiatives for enacting incremental policies in Canada: | WeNeedALaw has identified three key federal initiatives for enacting incremental policies in Canada: | ||
| Line 15: | Line 12: | ||
| - Protecting Pre-Born Victims of Crime | - Protecting Pre-Born Victims of Crime | ||
| - | === International Standards Abortion Law === | + | === International Standards Abortion Law - 10min === |
| {{youtube> | {{youtube> | ||
| Line 40: | Line 37: | ||
| - | === Defend Girls === | + | === Defend Girls - 10min === |
| https:// | https:// | ||
| Line 69: | Line 66: | ||
| * [[https:// | * [[https:// | ||
| - | === Pre-Born Victims of Crime === | + | === Pre-Born Victims of Crime - 10min === |
| https:// | https:// | ||
| Line 79: | Line 76: | ||
| * While this bill was voted down in Parliament before reaching committee stage, tens of thousands of Canadians were supporting this bill. | * While this bill was voted down in Parliament before reaching committee stage, tens of thousands of Canadians were supporting this bill. | ||
| * Independent polling also found that approximately 70% of Canadians (and close to 75% of women) support tougher penalties for those who commit crimes against a pregnant woman. This indicates a desire for change in Canada to reflect the value of a woman’s choice to carry her baby and her right to do so in safety. | * Independent polling also found that approximately 70% of Canadians (and close to 75% of women) support tougher penalties for those who commit crimes against a pregnant woman. This indicates a desire for change in Canada to reflect the value of a woman’s choice to carry her baby and her right to do so in safety. | ||
| + | |||
| + | FIXME https:// | ||
| === Other Initiatives === | === Other Initiatives === | ||
| - | * Conscience Rights (more of a provincial matter, but there' | + | * Conscience Rights (more of a provincial matter, but there' |
| * Statistics are terrible FIXME | * Statistics are terrible FIXME | ||
| ==== Provincial ==== | ==== Provincial ==== | ||
| - | Healthcare | + | Criminal law in Canada is a federal matter (unlike the US where there is state criminal law as well), but healthcare is a provincial issue. |
| - | FIXME just get a list of initiatives for quick mention | + | Just quickly |
| + | * provider regulations | ||
| + | * abortion clinic regulations | ||
| + | * regulate as surgical centres | ||
| + | * require licences | ||
| + | * require physicians only | ||
| + | * Informed consent | ||
| + | * risks of procedure, gestation and development of child, information about complications from procedure | ||
| + | * waiting periods | ||
| + | * ultrasound requirements | ||
| + | * fetal pain | ||
| + | * independent counselling requirement | ||
| + | * coercion signage and signing requirement | ||
| + | * parental rights / consent | ||
| + | * See http:// | ||
| + | * Adverse Prenatal Diagnoses and Informed Consent | ||
| + | * Reporting: collecting accurate and complete statistics | ||
| + | * Conscience rights | ||
| + | * Defunding | ||
| ==== Case Study: United States ==== | ==== Case Study: United States ==== | ||
| - | This works: | + | Michael J. New has been tracking the effects of the pro-life movement on the abortion rate in the United States for years, and has published studies on the effects of pro-life laws in reducing the abortion rate. |
| - | | + | |
| + | In December 2019, [[https:// | ||
| + | > The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) has released abortion data for 2016, indicating that the U.S. abortion rate has continued to decline, a trend that began in 1980. Between 2015 and 2016, both the number of abortions and the abortion rate (the number of abortions per 1,000 U.S. women of childbearing age) decreased by about 2 percent. The decline was fairly consistent, as 33 of the 46 states that reported abortion data saw their numbers decline. This is good news for pro-lifers, and for anyone who wants to see the incidence of abortion decrease. | ||
| + | > | ||
| + | > While much of the analysis of new abortion data typically focuses on short-term trends, the **long-term decline in the U.S. abortion rate is even more impressive**. According to the CDC, the abortion rate has **fallen by more than 25 percent between 2007 and 2016** among the 47 states that reported abortion data consistently during that timespan (excluding California, Maryland, and New Hampshire, which did not report abortion numbers). The data also indicate that the **abortion rate has fallen by approximately 50 percent since 1980.** The abortion trends reported by the CDC are similar to those shown by estimates from the Guttmacher Institute, which in September released its estimates for U.S. abortion data for 2017. | ||
| + | > | ||
| + | > Most of the media coverage of declining abortion numbers typically credits increased contraception use. But commentators often overlook a key factor in the long-term abortion-rate decline: the fact that **a higher percentage of women with unintended pregnancies carry them to term**. Data from Guttmacher show that between 1981 and 2011, the percentage of unintended pregnancies that resulted in an abortion fell from approximately 54 percent to 42 percent. | ||
| + | > | ||
| + | > Since the early 1990s, pro-lifers have made gains in **public opinion**, enacted a higher number of **pro-life laws**, and established more **pregnancy-help centers**. The declining abortion numbers, and the fact that more unintended pregnancies are being carried to term, is nice evidence that these pro-life efforts have been effective. Hopefully, the new CDC data will encourage pro-lifers and inspire them to continue their lifesaving efforts. | ||
| + | |||
| + | See also: | ||
| * https:// | * https:// | ||
| + | * FIXME links to his academic work | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Demand Side Policies (Social Support Policies) - 15min ===== | ||
| + | While supply side policies seek to restrict the availability/ | ||
| + | |||
| + | We often think about this in terms of the other arms of the pro-life movement beside the political arm - the educational arm seeks to make abortion unthinkable so that people won't desire it by changing hearts and minds on abortion, and the pastoral arm seeks to make abortion irrelevant by providing support to people who feel like they may have no other choice but abortion. | ||
| + | |||
| + | The educational and pastoral efforts are essential, however, there is also a huge opportunity to reduce the abortion rate from public policy efforts that reduce the demand for abortion by providing support. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== The Need ==== | ||
| + | * In the Guttmacher Institute' | ||
| + | * ARCC cites 18% of abortions for the same reason (FIXME citation needed, got that via JVM) | ||
| + | * The US Conference of Catholic Bishops has a publication: | ||
| + | * low income women are more likely to be anti-abortion, | ||
| + | * In a 2005 study, 73% of women undergoing an abortion said not being able to afford a baby now was a reason for the abortion | ||
| + | * That number rose to 81% for women below the federal poverty line | ||
| + | * while the abortion rate for American women declined by 8% between 2000 and 2008, among poor American women it increased by 18% | ||
| + | * One study found that poor women on Medicaid had twice the abortion rate of other women in their state. | ||
| + | * If the state’s Medicaid program paid for elective abortions, their abortion rate was more than four times that of other women. | ||
| + | * By offering “free” abortions, the government effectively places its thumb on the scale to favor death for the unborn child. | ||
| + | * By contrast, if these programs continue funding care for mothers and babies but stop funding abortion, abortions among women in the program decrease by as much as 35%. | ||
| + | * The USCCBR advocates for both pro-life laws and public policy to alleviate poverty and the economic pressure to abort | ||
| + | * Furthermore, | ||
| + | * Poverty leads to abortion, abortion leads to marital breakups and relationship break down, broken families leads to more poverty, which leads to more abortion... | ||
| + | * By contrast, marriage has been called " | ||
| + | * Thus, this isn't just about educational efforts to make abortion unthinkable or pastoral efforts to provide support, but there is a huge opportunity for public policies to lower the demand for abortion by providing social support for families and pregnant women | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== The Case ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | This makes //economic policy relevant to the question of reducing the demand for abortion and lowering abortion rates//(( This came out of conversation with Daniel Bader about the 2015 election: https:// | ||
| + | )) | ||
| + | |||
| + | [[https:// | ||
| + | > JVM: I've done a lot of research over the last couple years in terms of how the abortion rate is reduced because, one of the things I've noted is that both Canada and the US have extremely high abortion rates compared to countries with better social safety nets (e.g. the Netherlands, | ||
| + | * Charlie Camosy: think about the demand side of the abortion issue rather than the supply side | ||
| + | |||
| + | Also, 45: | ||
| + | |||
| + | e.g. read this blog post (FIXME summarize) [[https:// | ||
| + | |||
| + | > [Early 2019] Hungary’s prime minister has announced a raft of measures aimed at boosting the country’s declining birth rate and reducing immigration. Giving his annual State of the Nation address Sunday, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban announced a seven-point “Family Protection Action Plan” designed to promote marriage and families. | ||
| + | > | ||
| + | > Measures announced included waivers on personal income tax for women raising at least four children for the rest of their lives and subsidies for large families to buy larger cars. The ‘action plan’ also extended a loan program to help families with at least two children to buy homes. Every woman under 40 will also be eligible for a preferential loan when she first gets married. | ||
| + | > | ||
| + | > The government has also said it will spend more on Hungary’s heathcare system and will create 21,000 creche places. In addition, grandparents will be eligible to receive a childcare fee if they look after young children instead of the parents, Orban said. | ||
| + | > ... | ||
| + | > | ||
| + | > JVM: Orban’s policies have already contributed to a decline in the abortion rate, with LifeSite reporting in 2018 that numbers had dropped by more than a third compared to what they were in 2010—40, | ||
| - | ===== Demand Side Policies (Social Support Policies) ===== | ||