• Print
  • Send to a friend
  • Comment (123)
  •  

Abortion lobby group exploring legal options

Kandace Hagan, P.E.I. Reproductive Rights Association (PRRO), spokesperson Guardian photo

Kandace Hagan, P.E.I. Reproductive Rights Association (PRRO), spokesperson

Published on January 4, 2012
Published on January 4, 2012
Teresa Wright  RSS Feed
Topics :
PRRO , P.E.I. Reproductive Rights Association , Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada , Prince Edward Island , P.E.I. , Canada

The pro-choice group lobbying for changes to abortion access on P.E.I. is now actively exploring legal options after Premier Robert Ghiz stated recently he intends to keep the Island’s lack of abortion services at status quo.

The P.E.I. Reproductive Rights Association (PRRO) formed last November in an effort to increase access to information on abortion services and lobby for the procedure to made available in the province.

Prince Edward Island is the only province in Canada that does not provide any abortion services.

Despite gaining national media attention and support from numerous women’s groups and national rights organizations, Ghiz said he does not plan to change the Island’s abortion policies.

Now, the B.C. Civil Liberties Association has offered the PRRO help in exploring its legal options to continue to move the issue forward.

The association and the PRRO are now working on drafting a legal memo. PRRO spokesperson Kandace Hagen says launching a lawsuit is not a certainty yet, but all options are currently being explored.

"PRRO's not committing to going this route, but we need to explore the legality of the government's stance,” Hagen said.

“This is a case where the government is discriminating against women by not providing services for which they have the resources because of political reasons."

The Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada has already stated publicly it believes the P.E.I. government is violating the law and could be taken to court over the lack of abortion services on P.E.I.

The coalition wrote a letter to Health Minister Doug Currie in November, calling P.E.I.’s abortion policies ‘illegal.’

Joyce Arthur, executive director of ARCC, said she believes the P.E.I. government is not only open to being sued, but that it would be unsuccessful in such a court battle.

“If it actually went to court they would lose because it’s quite clear that they do have to provide these services,” she said in an interview with The Guardian Nov. 23.

Arthur cited the 1988 Supreme Court ruling that struck down a previous law prohibiting abortions because its restrictions infringed upon a woman's right to "life, liberty and security of person."

She believes P.E.I.’s policy of not providing abortion at all in the province contravenes these same principles as well as certain provisions within the Canada Health Act.

Requiring women to travel off-Island, even if the procedure itself is funded, fails as an acceptable alternative because young, poor or disadvantaged women don’t have the resources to travel. These women are being discriminated against,” Arthur said.

Hagen echoed Arthur’s sentiments, saying she too believes P.E.I.’s laws are discriminatory and that her group will not give up fighting for women to have equal access to abortions.

“As an advocacy group, we will continue to apply pressure to the government for as long as it takes."

Abortions are not done in Island hospitals and there are no private clinics that offer the service in the province. The government does pay for abortions off-Island, but only with a doctor referral and if done in a hospital. Private clinic abortions are not covered, nor are travel expenses for any abortions.

Comments

  • Username
    Toni Summers
    - February 21, 2012 at 16:13:36

    I don't care what your religious leaders are saying, what you believe from the Bible (or any other holy book), I don't care if your girlfriend had an abortion without even telling you she was pregnant - I simply do not care! A woman's body is just that - a woman's body and nobody is going to tell us what we can and can't do with them. If WE get pregnant and WE do not want the baby, for a miriad of reasons, then it is OUR decision as to whether we will have an abortion or not. That is what Pro-Choice is about - a woman's right to CHOOSE!! You can rant and rave about this until the cows come home and you people just may get the laws change but I can assure you, abortions are not going anywhere. There have been women having their babies aborted for milleniums and it will never stop, no matter what! I could go on and on with the REAL reasons why most women think it is best that they abort their babies but you've heard them many times before and you still don't care about women's rights ... and the worst thing is, most of whon are writing about anti-abortion are women! Who are you, as a woman, to tell a another woman that it is a sin to have an abortion? Where do get off?!!!! And I don't want to hear about the fetus, either. A fetus is not a person until the baby can live and breath outside of a woman's womb. If a woman kills her live baby then it's murder but not while it is still inside of her. I am so angry with this stupid debate. If you are anti-abortion, then don't have abortions but if you are Pro-Choice then you have an option plus it is the law of the land. Let it go because there will always be someone who is willing to perform an abortion. But you'd rather drive it underground again when women died because of some unscruplious charlatan who gave her a 'back lane abortion' and left her to hemorrage to death. This is what you would prefer? Take a chill-pill and give it up because no good will come of it if you people succeed in changing Canadian law.

    Submit a Comment

  • Username
    MAB
    - January 10, 2012 at 17:22:43

    I don't understand if you take a pregnant dog or cat and kill then there would be a public out cry... Charges would be lade and Breaking news ... But it is okay to have an abortion And Kill an unwanted fetus it's Why not legalize PRO Suicide By a Doctors Help the Same Idea ...

    Submit a Comment

    • Username
      island atheist
      - January 11, 2012 at 12:37:33

      I am assuming you are religious.

  • Username
    Twiggy
    - January 10, 2012 at 09:01:51

    Ignore the anti-choicers. Ghiz and Currie want you to focus on these vocal folks. Focus your political attack on these guys, the two politicians responsible. That is what they don't want. I am beginning to realize the anti-choice lobby is stronger in each of the old major parties than I ever imagined. The anti-choice stance just may be a requirement of leadership for these ruling institutions. Aim the political pressure at the people holding the offices in power not those swinging the signs.

    Submit a Comment

    • Username
      Confussed
      - January 10, 2012 at 11:46:35

      I have to say that the Prochoice side has done little other than mudslinging and name call. Why would anyone change their minds to support them when their only argument is that if you don't you are stupid? Some of us want a little more than the lies that there is no place else on he world where abortion is the least bit controversial. Until they dispense with the lies, I will not support a law suit to make it more convenient than other medical services.

    • Username
      Prochoice
      - January 10, 2012 at 14:53:05

      If you need more that has already been presented, you can't think straight enough for more information to be of any use to you. The people has spoken. It is time for the government to start following the law and stop abusing women's rights.

  • Username
    Twiggy
    - January 9, 2012 at 11:36:18

    Robert Ghiz and Doug Currie are old, young men. They are behaving with the same backwardness that politicians demonstrated thirty years ago on the abortion issue. Women and progressive voters in their two districts should give them a really hard time over this. Stop letting these guys pretend they are progressive politicians. They both have no problem with 1950s style Daddy Knows Best politics. Tell them really clearly------- we will vote for you no longer!!!

    Submit a Comment

    • Username
      To Twiggy
      - January 9, 2012 at 13:41:16

      Still haven't heard why it is an issue where the government is legally mandated to pay for this. Just that you don't like it. If you want me to support you, you have to do more than name call. I think the fact that there is a law that is forcing them, but they are breaking, has been soundly refuted. Now that we don't HAVE to do it, explain to me why I SHOULD do it, and not because someone is inconvenienced. I think there are a lot of islanders who inconvenienced a lot when it comes to medical care, and no one has given me a good reason why they should all accept the fact that they aren't worth dirt and lament that this isn't convenient enough for you. Right to choose? I choose not to have an illness that prevents me from supporting my family (I don't but could at some point). My body. My choice. I do not have the right to have the government help me make the procedure to fix that convenient, it seems. I have yet to see a good argument why I should have to forget about my right to get my medical treatment, to support you when you hold your problem to be so sacrosanct that it trumps evey other possible medical issue that any islander could ever possibly have. It has been said that a fanatic is somone who can't change their position and refuses to change the subject, and the way I have see pro-choice posts I would say that many of them fit the bill of fanatics.

    • Username
      i have to say
      - January 9, 2012 at 12:58:29

      If you could respond to my question/statement, I might be more apt to support you.

    • Username
      Prochoice
      - January 9, 2012 at 16:20:42

      Twiggy should not have to answer to anyone. I don't understand why the concept of a woman's right to choose should have to be defended to anyone. Antichoicers appear to be particularly dense.

  • Username
    I have to say
    - January 8, 2012 at 09:53:38

    I have to say that I am not comfortable supporting a situation where during childbirth, any point up until the child is completely out of the birth canal, a woman can say kill it and people would applaud her exercising her freedom of choice. At that point the only difference between personhood and nonpersonhood is a few inches. I can't see that difference in location being scientifically defensible as a definition of personhood.

    Submit a Comment

    • Username
      But
      - January 8, 2012 at 13:40:11

      And the reasonably intelligent among us don't feel comfortable giving legal rights to a parasitical tissue mass.

    • Username
      I have to say
      - January 9, 2012 at 09:08:43

      Unless you can give me a scientific explanation of why those couple of inches in location are a definitive definition of what it means to be human, other than your opinion that otherwise violates some nebulous idea of women's rights, I am unconvinced. Simply implying the fact that I have any second thoughts on this is a sign that I'm not reasonably intelligent is insulting and really does nothing to convince me that your position has merit. Showing merit involves laying out facts, and not insulting people until they shut up. Such behaviour is something I would expect from a child who has no reasons, but simply wants their way.

  • Username
    Wtf
    - January 7, 2012 at 10:17:24

    Like I said, take it to court. I want to see your argument. http://www.lifecanada.org/html/abortion/medicare/deinsure.htm

    Submit a Comment

    • Username
      Prochoice
      - January 8, 2012 at 09:56:13

      You can't trust anything you find on an anti-choice website. We will sue, and we will win because the actions of the government are criminal violations of human rights of island women.

    • Username
      Island Atheist
      - January 8, 2012 at 16:41:51

      unless you get some sort of religious type who only got to be a judge because of cronyism. You need to find a way to keep the fundies out of this.

    • Username
      prodemocracy
      - January 8, 2012 at 20:01:29

      From the view of a free democratic society, Isaland Atheist's position is disturbing.

  • Username
    Head Shaker
    - January 6, 2012 at 22:50:30

    Has anyone actually read the Canada Health Act? http://laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-6/ Which clause is violated?

    Submit a Comment

  • Username
    Head shaker
    - January 6, 2012 at 22:48:21

    Perhaps folks should Google.  PEl (Minister of Health) v. Morgentaler {1996, PEICA}

    Submit a Comment

  • Username
    Saturday Noight
    - January 6, 2012 at 10:36:19

    The only ones who will get what they want are the lawyers.

    Submit a Comment

  • Username
    Wtf
    - January 6, 2012 at 10:36:09

    And literacy doesn't seem to be a requirement to be Prochoice. I was quite clear that I support their law suit and hope they actually go through with it to the very end. I hope they go all the way to the supreme court, if need be. I am simply not making the assumption that this is a slam dunk case. A lot of people start law suits on the advice of lawyers, even of he lawyer knows there is little chance of winning, unless the lawyer is planning on working for free. go ahead and sue. I'll donate if they set up an online donation system. I want to see this come before a judge. If their lawyer has this all worked out, they should be able to be specific about the grounds of the case, rather than a vague description that they find it inconvenient. And yes, there are islanders who are not completely ignorant rubes and know you need to be extremely specific and have deep pockets if you want to sue the government. I WANT to see the specific arguements that they will use, and hope it is better than the stuff I've seen posted so far. If the judge questions them, calling them a pea brained catholic bigot, may not be very impressive. I do wish they had consulted someone before they chose their misleading name, though. As if women only have one right concerning their reproduction.........

    Submit a Comment

  • Username
    Which law
    - January 6, 2012 at 10:34:28

    All the laws on PEI are online. Which law, which act specifically, is preventing abortion. Miss Hagen is specific that there is a discriminitatory law she is going to fight. Which one? Give us the name of the name of the act so we can all read it. What section of the Canada Health Act is violated, and how does the specific act violate the specific clause?

    Submit a Comment

  • Username
    PEI grow up
    - January 6, 2012 at 10:17:37

    Abortion is legal in Canada. Anyone who belittles a woman's decision and says " In too many cases it is used as a method of birth control" is just plain wrong. I think it's impossible to actually place yourself in a woman's shoes when she must make a decision like that. Please don't make this sound like a trivial decision, women have a right to make this decision without the extra trauma of having family, friends and her community judge, harrass and antagonize her. Please just have some respect.

    Submit a Comment

    • Username
      So you are saying
      - January 6, 2012 at 13:40:41

      So you are saying it is impossible for it to be used too often as a method of birth control, and only a bigot wouldn't pay for it? NEWS FLASH: It is legal, it is avaialable. The issue at hand is how CONVENIENT does it have to be and why the overriding concern is this one procedure is convenient and for any one else for whom if the medical procedure isn't convenient enough they are told to move. Need cardiac resussitation or having a stroke in Souris? Not convenient? Stop whining and move closer to someplace the provides help, we're told. Moncton to far away to have an abortion (or other procedure)? Move closer to Moncton, we're told. There are other people in this province looking for medical service, and they are all being told to suck it up and shut their GD mouths or move. It is hard to single this one out and cry myself to sleep that it isn't convenient enough for them. I'm not against abortion. If a woman want one, get one. I am not going to lift a finger to stop them. I AM against all other islanders being addressed as ignorant second class citizens becuase we aren't pregnant with regrets of nature taking it's natural course.

  • Username
    Wtf
    - January 5, 2012 at 19:22:47

    i fully 100% support this group taking the government to court claiming, as is done in the article, that PEI laws are discriminatory. I want to see them get laughed out of court for not being able to answer which law is discriminatory. there is no law on abortion. There is no law saying you can't have one. The current billing process makes it inconvenient unless a local doctor decides to begin performing the service. Is that is the same as there being a discriminitory law? I believe there is a rule that if you lose your case you pay both side"s legal bill. You'll Make some lawyers very happy

    Submit a Comment

    • Username
      WTF indeed
      - January 5, 2012 at 21:41:47

      If only the PRRO had thought to consult you before relying on the legal advice of actual lawyers from around the country. I guess they didn't realize that "Islander" is a professional qualification that makes a person an expert on everything.

    • Username
      lol
      - January 5, 2012 at 21:38:21

      I doubt they know what they are in for. They may end up with a decision that as long as the government doesn't actively prevent them, they aren't violating anything. They really need to read the 1988 decision. The lawyer better, because the gov lawyer'll know it inside out.

  • Username
    Captain Canuck
    - January 5, 2012 at 19:15:48

    Some of these posts have a very interesting inference. Some of you think that pro-life is only a Catholic thing. There is no religion in the world that is not against abortions. Many of their leaders may be of different views, but there are no Christian, Jewish, Muslim etc. religions that can condone an abortion. To those who call it a Catholic view... you should consider this a religious / secular (but not athiest) dispute. As far as the reference to vegans... all vegans who are honest should be against abortions.

    Submit a Comment

    • Username
      you are wrong
      - January 6, 2012 at 10:35:28

      It is largely a Catholic thing. RC policies take a very antiquated view of the world, even though well over 90% of RC women (in Canada at least) practice birth control and comprise a good proportion of those who seek abortion services as well. But if you think that all Christian churches are anti-abortion, then you're very wrong. The United Church of Canada is this nation's largest protestant denomination and they call for equal access to abortion services: http://www.united-church.ca/beliefs/policies/1990/a111

    • Username
      REEEALLY is that so
      - January 6, 2012 at 13:46:55

      What about the Anglicans, the Presbyterians, the Baptists, the Mormons, the Muslims, the Pentecostals (one of the largest growing groups worldwide), .......? None of these are Roman Catholic. I suppose they don't exist. ie, http://www.presbyterian.ca/webfm_send/347 (The Presbyterian Church is against Abortion on Demand and states The unborn child has a right to life such that only a danger to the mother’s life or the likelihood of permanent or prolonged mental or physical impairment to the mother should be regarded as grounds for abortion.)

    • Username
      just a question
      - January 6, 2012 at 13:36:19

      According to the United Church thingy posted, there is only a single doctor practicing abortions in Newfoundland. What happens if he stops or moves. Are these folks going to sue Newfoundland unless another doctor is pressed into service and told he/she must now perform them? Is it less of a hardship for a woman in northern Labrador to travel to St John's than it is for someone from Summerside to go to Moncton? Or does the fact that they are still in the same province make the trip and expense acceptable?

    • Username
      Just a question
      - January 9, 2012 at 14:23:44

      Preparing to sue Newfoundland for not providing a second doctor, in case the first is unavailable, would seem to be "fair", but that would eliminate the slogan that PEI alone doesn't provide adequeate access.

  • Username
    bob from cardigan
    - January 5, 2012 at 16:18:54

    Bob is wrong, If you view life as black and white you probably don't appreciate the diversity of opinion and you probably think you are always right. If your mother decided to have an abortion you would not exist, so you see It's a very complicated matter. The right of the fetus is being ignored for the sake of the right of the person to abort. I find that troubling for some reason, maybe because being a parent I realize that the life of my child for me started the first time I seen the ultrasound. There's a little helpless life form inside there that is fighting to live and to be born. Anyway, there is no changing opinions. You will believe what you want but in 100 years this issue will be considered barbaric and won't be a matter of religious right or social left, but simply a humanistic one. I care not for the arguments of both sides of the extreme, but would like us to discuss it in a scientific and humanistic relevant way. All life is precious, is it not?

    Submit a Comment

    • Username
      SHELLEY Brown
      - January 5, 2012 at 19:17:25

      This spelled ShellEy agrees with the Shellie spelled IE. Wonder, How many of pea brain, bigots, hypocrites have personally One on One at any time assisted or offered to assist a struggling single parent their child with NO family, a deadbeat husband & his deadbeat family? A drive, a $20-$30-$40-$50 dollars or IE: grocery gift cetificate in person, by snail mail, email, a phone call? I Have. Other than whine, what do You do to help? The PEI Government IS in breach of the Canadian Health Act AND the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Keep close to and in ongoing touch with the B.C Civil Liberties Org.!

    • Username
      WTF
      - January 5, 2012 at 21:53:27

      Then sue. If you lose, I expect to hear how all the judges are corrupt catholics. But to sue you have to be extremely deatailed, and so far no one has put forward solid explanations as to what clauses are being violated and explaining how the government's position cannot be interpreted as meeting the criteria. All I see is vague whining.

  • Username
    pat
    - January 5, 2012 at 16:18:20

    So those that think abortion is barbaric, inhumane, and murder must be vegans, right?

    Submit a Comment

    • Username
      Wtf
      - January 5, 2012 at 17:48:47

      No. If you cannot tell the difference between an 8 month old human fetus and a slice of cheese, you are too stupid to be bothered with.

  • Username
    idea
    - January 5, 2012 at 16:17:41

    Let's have PEI merge with NS and NB into one big happy province called Acadia or Maritimes. It would provide abortion services at certain public hospitals. Women from the tiny rural areas would still have to drive to those hospitals to get the abortion services though.

    Submit a Comment

  • Nancy Robertson
    Nancy Robertson
    - January 5, 2012 at 16:16:45

    "It is a poverty to decide that a child must die so that you may live as you wish." Mother Teresa

    Submit a Comment

  • Username
    country boy
    - January 5, 2012 at 16:16:35

    BECAUSE>>>>I'm sorry, I forgot that everyone has rights and no has responsibilities. I wonder if your mother had decided to have an abortion. How would you feel about her right to do that? You have been given a voice. the unborn have not.

    Submit a Comment

  • Username
    Seriously
    - January 5, 2012 at 16:12:28

    How about you make the "CHOICE" to have sex, so think about that choice!!! If it's rape they do provide a morning after pill!!! And as for the government helping pay to kill an unborn child is disguisting!!!!! And obviously you people with your coments haven't had to pay to go to the IWK with a sick child or pregnancy complications!!! Maybe when your in that position it wouldn`t be so frustrating that your government help the these women abort their unborn child when other women are doing everything the possibly can to save theirs!!!! and not getting any help from the government to do so!!!! SERIOUSLY!!

    Submit a Comment

    • Username
      Actually
      - January 5, 2012 at 19:14:49

      Yes, many do make the choice of having sex, that is a reality. But you don't choose to have hair in your food when you go to a fast food joint. Obviously the analogy I just made is a faulty one, but I don't wish to complicate the matter further. When rape is involved, I think you'll find that the morning after pill is the last thing on a woman's mind. I'd imagine the trauma of the experience would be one's mind as opposed to going to the drug store to pick up some contraceptives. For someone who has claimed that their former experience has led them to their position, you speak with an air of ignorance in respect to what's on the mind of a person who has been violated. Also, I find it unfathomable that someone who has apparently dealt with the lack of reproductive services would lobby against offering more services. But I ask anyone and everyone this question: in any other context, do you think it is alright for a person to use another person's body without their initial and continued consent?

    • Username
      To Actually
      - January 5, 2012 at 21:53:52

      "Yes, many do make the choice of having sex, that is a reality. But you don't choose to have hair in your food when you go to a fast food joint." What the heck are you going on about?

    • Username
      For clarification
      - January 6, 2012 at 10:21:47

      The analogy I was making is this: just because you choose to partake in sexual intercourse, doesn't mean you are choosing to conceive. Dependent on your or other's preparations, i.e. contraception, abstinence etc. the chances of conceiving are drastically different. Just like when you choose to order from a fast food restaurant, you probably didn't choose to receive a hair in your food. Which, dependant on your or other's preparations, i.e. hygiene, hair nets or abstaining from ordering etc. the chances of recieving a strand of hair in your food would be drastically different. I hope this clears this up!

    • Username
      JUst because
      - January 6, 2012 at 13:42:13

      "The analogy I was making is this: just because you choose to partake in sexual intercourse, doesn't mean you are choosing to conceive" Just because I don't salt the walkway up to my house with enough salt does not mean I choose to pay for the injuries of the delivery guy who falls and breaks a few ribs. I am not saying that the two are equal, but when you do something there is a natural consequence to the action. Athough I support a woman's right to choose, this argument is just plain stupid. If you know action A is designed to produce consequence B and although you take precautions B still happens; it really can't be validly argued that you are completely baffled about the fact that B happened. You knew it was one possibility and you chose to do A anyway accepting the risk. I'd move on to an argument that will make people less likely to laugh when they read it.

    • Username
      Once more
      - January 6, 2012 at 16:21:56

      I like how you were able to turn that analogy around on me, ha ha clearly I didn't think it through further than readily admitting that it was a faulty analogy. But my point wasn't to be "baffled about the fact that b happened." It was to illustrate a point that in our society today we don't expect something that has such a small chance of occurring through an every day actions. We expect a plane to land, not crash and what not.

    • Username
      just because
      - January 6, 2012 at 22:58:12

      What about a man who gets a woman pregnant? He takes all kinds of precautions. It is very unlikely that the woman would get pregnant. She decides not to abort. Is the man in any way responsible for the child. He didn't choose for her to be pregnant. He had no say on whether she aborted. Are you saying that it is unjust for him to provide her with child support payments because he is not responisble for her having a child to support? If it is unjust would you support a men's group that would change the law to prevent the injustice? In this case the man has LESS choice than the woman. If she can get rid of her problem, why can the man not use similar justification to get rid of his?

    • Username
      Hmm
      - January 7, 2012 at 14:06:21

      Hey where do you live? If it's not PEI then "your government" is offering this option legally and for free.

    • Username
      Just because
      - January 7, 2012 at 17:33:42

      Just because there is not a law against something does not mean the government has to provide it for you for free

    • Username
      Prochoice
      - January 7, 2012 at 17:33:36

      Obviously a hate speech site that should be closed down.

    • Username
      Prochoice
      - January 8, 2012 at 09:56:41

      By which I meant the site listing the court cases.

  • Username
    Facts
    - January 5, 2012 at 16:11:30

    @ J. Arsenault: Over 1/2 of women seeking abortions report using another method of birth control at the time of conception. NO contraceptive method is 100% effective 100% of the time. Not to mention the pregnancies that result from rape. Where's the choice in that? Also: nice sl** shaming! Too bad women get to choose whether to carry a fetus to term AND how many men to sleep with. Come to think of it, maybe we shouldn't let them decide how to dress either, or what job to have, or or or ... @ It Is What It Is: Yes, clearly all women seeking abortions use it as a form of birth control. After all, what could be more convenient than travelling off-Island to undergo invasive uterine surgery every month? Seriously, listen to yourself. Also: WHAT are you basing this claim on? Do you even KNOW any women who've undergone abortions? If you do, I'd suggest listening to them. If you don't, do some research before spouting off your uninformed opinions.

    Submit a Comment

  • Username
    Try Again
    - January 5, 2012 at 16:10:05

    @ J. Arsenault: Over 1/2 of women seeking abortions report using another method of birth control at the time of conception. NO contraceptive method is 100% effective 100% of the time. Not to mention the pregnancies that result from rape. Where's the choice in that? Also: nice sl** shaming! Too bad women get to choose whether to carry a fetus to term AND how many men to sleep with. Come to think of it, maybe we shouldn't let them decide how to dress either, or what job to have, or or or ... Also, newsflash: this group isn't lobbying for women's rights to abortion -- that was already established in 1988. They're fighting for access. Try to remember what year you're in.

    Submit a Comment

    • Username
      more facts
      - January 6, 2012 at 10:12:25

      @facts you forgot that less than 1 percent are due to sexual assault and the other fact was when the group first came out they said they wanted more awareness for women on what their choices were in regards to pregnancy masked the agenda to bring the medical procedure, which is paid for by health PEI, to the Island. PRRO are arguing geography of the service with out making a business case when there are so many othe procures that done off island.

  • Username
    what's it going to be
    - January 5, 2012 at 16:09:21

    unless forced by horrific interference of some ugly force ,why would anyone ---------------man or woman ---------want this choice --- JUST IMAGINE --you ask yourself "what's it going to be --??????? - BOY ? -?--- GIRL ????-------MORE THAN ONE -? ------- -------------------------------------------- or--- MEDICAL WASTE ?????????????

    Submit a Comment

  • Username
    Some people..
    - January 5, 2012 at 16:09:07

    Wow! Some people have a lot of nerve. Honestly I'm ashamed to call a lot of Islanders, Islanders. No matter what happens on the Island women are going to either go through with abortion or they will decide to keep it, it may be harder to do if they have to travel but they will still find a way to get over across if that is truly what they want. No rude comment, or PRO life group is going to change them, and this is stirring up a lot of trouble for women. Our government sucks, and we should be able to say that our Islanders know better. I hope everyone decides to think before they post another comment, if you have nothing nice to say, then don't say anything at all. Also stop ragging on the Journalist, she's doing the job and it is not one sided!

    Submit a Comment

  • Username
    Neutral
    - January 5, 2012 at 16:08:29

    Everything is already in place in PEI to offer abortions on the Island; that is the doctors, the facilities, etc. Abortion services do not require the recruitment of specialists or the purchase and maintenance of expensive equipment that is not cost effective to have in every hospital in every province. The only issue is the willingness to offer these services which is a political and religous debate only.

    Submit a Comment

    • Username
      Prochoice
      - January 5, 2012 at 17:49:46

      Neutral? If you are not with us then you are with the terrorists, hating freedom and wanting to deny women basic human rights. How disgusting!

  • Username
    outside the box
    - January 5, 2012 at 11:59:58

    PRRO started out as saying they wanted information given to women about their choices as it pertains to pregnancy. I guess Oprah was right, when some one shows you who they are believe them. This is a pro abortion group. There is nothing baring abortions on PEI except the same thing as the rest of services. They are performing them in various forms when the mother is in immediate danger. You cannot find a doctor to perform it and no one has answered whether if the service is brought to PEI will there be a service that will then be farmed out like Head injuries to Moncton, Heart to Saint John, major othopaedic care to Halifax and something simple as a dematologist in Moncton. I can't wait for them to win so all of the other clinic medical services can be paid for. People will be able to stop selling their belongings to live near a hospital such as Toronto waiting on transplants or the IWK to get care for their children. I am pro choice too by the way and I am pro business plan. Maybe BC could pay for a doctor to fly in to do the abortions instead of wasting time on a case they will lose. PEI pays for abortions in Halifax like a great deal of other medical conditions. You are arguing geography when if you lived in a burb of Toronto it would take you the same amount of time to drive downtown to get to the clinic. I wonder if the dynamic on this would change if women had to get an abortion if the biological father said they would not support the child once it was born?

    Submit a Comment

  • Username
    Jimmy McNulty
    - January 5, 2012 at 11:59:04

    Government only responds when sued, so big thanks to BC for sharing their organizations resources and helping out the little guy.

    Submit a Comment

    • Username
      Send a doctor
      - January 5, 2012 at 16:06:48

      If they really wanted to help, it would be easier to simply send a doctor and bill the province for performing the procedure. If he isn't lynched in the street, some existing doctors may follow suit if they are supportive of the procedure. I know that isn't as exciting, but are you looking for publicity stunts or do you actually want to change the situation?

  • Username
    outside the box
    - January 5, 2012 at 11:58:44

    Incorrect. The piece of papaer they are waiting for a Doctor to make application to do the proceedure. There was a Doctor on Compass that said it should be available but yet he would not make the application to do so. Abortions are not illegal on PEI but to do so with out an application is. They currently pay some Doctors in Halifax in a hospital setting to perform the proceedure who are licensed to do so.

    Submit a Comment

  • Username
    country boy
    - January 5, 2012 at 11:08:04

    If we can find the money to fund abortions why can't we find the money for invitro fertilization? Our society needs a shake up.

    Submit a Comment

    • Username
      Because
      - January 5, 2012 at 11:56:36

      Because in vitro is not a basic human right. Free government funded convenient access to abortions is .

    • Username
      Canned pop
      - January 6, 2012 at 22:58:43

      Abortion is a basic human right, just like canned pop and cheap gas.

  • Username
    Prochoice
    - January 5, 2012 at 11:07:58

    First of all they are not fighting for the right to abortion they are fighting for accessibility, abortions are legal that debate has been won. Second, I agree we should be fighting for a children's hospital and nurosergans however those things take specialized doctors, we already have doctors that are able and willing to proform abortions we just need one little piece of paper saying by law they can.

    Submit a Comment

    • Username
      Wtf
      - January 5, 2012 at 11:59:17

      Have you even been paying attention? The government has clearly stated that if a doctor wishes to perform the procedure there is a billing code for them to get paid. There is not much more that can be done other than passing legislation to fire any doctor that doesn't do them. If we lose doctors over this, I will be suggesting a class action suit against this organization.

  • Username
    it is what it is
    - January 5, 2012 at 10:53:07

    Abortion is a term used for the legalized killing of the unborn. In too many cases it is used as a method of birth control. There are many people out there willing to adopt your baby, love your baby and raise the baby as their own. There is a choice. What will yours be?

    Submit a Comment

    • Username
      anonymous
      - January 6, 2012 at 10:21:02

      1) Abortion is not a method of birth control and I think you would be hard pressed to find more than five people in the next hour who truly believe that or use it as such. 2) There are NOT "many people" willing to adopt a baby. If that were true, why are there so many kids that get shuffled from foster home to foster home until they are 18, where they are dumped out to fend for themselves? There are more people on this planet already than we ourselves are able to take care of. It is too easy for someone like you to back up your ideology with "someone else will take care of it". That is not acceptable. You take some responsibility yourself. YOU go see the truth of where all these so called people dying to adopt babies are.

    • Username
      To anonymous
      - January 6, 2012 at 16:02:36

      How is abortion not birth control? You are using it to control whether or not there is a birth. It seems that that is pretty much the definition of birth control. I'm sure that you are trying to say that it is not anyone's PRIMARY method of birth control. My primary method of travel is not by taxi, but it would be stupid to say that a taxi is not a method of transportation. As for your second point, by defining personhood differently you could make an arguement that orphans should be killed in a form of post natal abortion. (The proposal is very similar to what pro-life poropnents hear when they are told abortion should be able to take place right up to and including labour) I wish pro-choicer could come up with better arguments than it is not birth control (absolutely wrong), anything legal should be paid for by taxes (extreme socialism/communism) and it is violating my rights because it isn't convenient enough for me.

  • Username
    Too bad
    - January 5, 2012 at 10:42:02

    Check the legal precedents. Appeals court has ruled that the man has no say in the matter.

    Submit a Comment

  • Username
    J. Arsenault
    - January 5, 2012 at 10:25:52

    People, Am I reading this article correctly, this group wants women to have the right to legally kill unborn children. what about making a choice as to become pregnant or not. there would be very little cost involved and no legalities, just a responsible choice.

    Submit a Comment

    • Username
      Such ignorance
      - January 5, 2012 at 12:00:08

      The use of the term children to describe a simple tissue mass make me wonder of you even understand what is being discussed.

  • Username
    Zoey
    - January 5, 2012 at 10:25:44

    Keep Fighting. You will win eventually.

    Submit a Comment

  • Username
    J. Arsenault
    - January 5, 2012 at 10:25:30

    Re: comments made by Too Bad that a man's comment doesn't count. I wonder how a woman gets pregnant if a man isn't needed, therefore, mens' comments must be equally counted. However, there is another way to solve the problem, stop having sex with every Tom, Dick and Harry and then complaining when you can't access an an abortion when you "accidentally" get pregnant.

    Submit a Comment

    • Username
      tommi
      - January 5, 2012 at 11:58:52

      too bad every Tom Dick and Harry couldn't be the ones to get pregnant. I'm sure this wouldn't even be an issue then, abortion would have been available long ago and much more easily accessible.

    • Username
      Yeah CUz
      - January 6, 2012 at 16:20:25

      Everything haveing to do with men is a priority? Like the Men's shelter that almost didn't get opened.

  • Username
    Zoey
    - January 5, 2012 at 10:24:07

    Keep fighting, you will win.

    Submit a Comment

  • Username
    They are legal
    - January 5, 2012 at 09:58:28

    NO ONE IS STOPPING YOU FROM HAVING AN ABORTION. NOT BEING CONVENIENT ENOUGH IS NOT A VALID REASON FOR LEGAL ACTION. If you think you can prove that the current situation is actually a charter violation, go for it. I don't think it will be as slam dunk as you think it will be.

    Submit a Comment

    • Username
      Chris S
      - January 5, 2012 at 16:16:27

      Actually if the current system prevents or impedes low income or travel restricted or high risk women from having the procedure and endangers their health in any way then this group could very well be on to something.

    • Username
      They are legal
      - January 6, 2012 at 13:35:29

      If they picked something that there was no social divide on and used it as a test case saying that all medical procedures should be performed locally, they could have gotten more traction and just put abortion in with the list of procedures that are added to the local services list. Now they've just pissed people off so they did in their heels.

  • Username
    GJR
    - January 5, 2012 at 09:58:13

    Best thing about PEI is our lack of abortion facilities. Look around you and imagine the people who would not be here if abortions were more readily available.

    Submit a Comment

  • Username
    im not saying im just saying
    - January 5, 2012 at 09:56:58

    the liberals have a bunch of lawyers on retainer and getting paid to do nothing anyways, might as well sue them and make them work.

    Submit a Comment

  • Username
    Modern Island Man
    - January 5, 2012 at 09:56:49

    I personally will not vote again in this province until access to abortion is changed. That's my commitment to all of the island's politicians. Come on down to my house to sell your platform and you will be told to get the hell off my steps. Cowards.

    Submit a Comment

    • Username
      You sir are a moron
      - January 5, 2012 at 10:53:19

      You have no idea how a democracy works, do you? If you stop voting there is no reason for a politician to care what you think. Not thinking this through are you?

    • Username
      Kate
      - January 5, 2012 at 16:18:10

      Hmm, no, PRRO was always clear about being a pro-access group. PRRO had a rally for access.

    • Username
      CFA
      - January 6, 2012 at 10:16:25

      That's an ignorant statement. By refusing to vote, you are barring yourself from having a voice.

  • Username
    neighbour of ghiz
    - January 5, 2012 at 09:56:15

    I support PRRO completely. Ghiz is my MLA and neighbour and I have to say I have never been so disgusted and angry with this guy as I have been since he made that announcement. If PRRO sets up a website and a PayPal or Google Checkout account for accepting donations for its legal efforts, I will certainly be contributing. The PEI Government's 19th century mentality needs to be yanked forward into the 21st century !

    Submit a Comment

    • Username
      Maybe
      - January 5, 2012 at 16:06:31

      If PRRO starts supporting other reproductive rights, rather than just one, I might support them. Otherwise I think their name is false advertising.

  • Username
    Robin
    - January 5, 2012 at 09:53:22

    I don't think any PEI child and their family should have to go to the IWK. Also, we should not have to go to Halifax for open heart surgery or a kidney transplant. Moncton is too far to go for brain trauma treatment. If anyone is thinking of suing the government for more medical services, they really need to look at their priorities.

    Submit a Comment

  • Username
    Anne Wright
    - January 5, 2012 at 09:53:06

    Most Liberal support comes from the RC constituents of this province--and Premier Ghiz doesn't plan to do anything about the abortion issue? Sheeesh, what a surprise--here we are--stuck with a Premier more interested in retaining power than doing the right thing. But, Ghiz is getting it wrong--women are beginning to see the importance of pulling together to get the job done. Let's hope the Premier gets the message that the religious right are simply being left behind in favour of common sense, science, and the need to do what's best for people at large. Bringing into the world unwanted children is inhumane plain and simple.

    Submit a Comment

    • Username
      Omg
      - January 5, 2012 at 11:06:39

      Everyone who doesn't agree with you is a stupid catholic, eh?

    • Username
      What about
      - January 6, 2012 at 22:58:58

      What about keeping unwanted children who are here because the mother didn't abort. Is letting them live humane? They will suffer exactly the same things that are being argued that they are better off dead than having to go through. Would not the humane thing be to put them out of their misery?

  • Username
    This is going too far
    - January 5, 2012 at 09:51:22

    Anyone who is against abortion is too stupid to be allowed to vote. Anyone who thinks it is a sin should perhaps not be allowed to graduate from school as they obviously haven't learned enough to cope in the real world. It isn't a debatable issue.

    Submit a Comment

  • Username
    Nice
    - January 5, 2012 at 09:18:51

    Yes, because an abortion is the EXACT same thing as Sunday Shopping.

    Submit a Comment

  • Username
    John W.A. Curtis
    - January 5, 2012 at 09:18:15

    Take P.E.I. to court, too many old catholics want to control other people's lives. Legal actionis the only way to bring change

    Submit a Comment

  • Username
    still confused
    - January 5, 2012 at 09:17:48

    so, tell me again what the policy is? You're telling me if an Island doctor said he would do an abortion, the province wouldn't pay? Please, would someone clarify?

    Submit a Comment

  • Username
    Give it a try
    - January 5, 2012 at 09:17:37

    Go for it. A bit of advice. There is a big difference between threatening to sue and actually winning a case. Once you get into court, thing get binding and very expensive, and a lot more depends on the opinions of the judge n question and the exact definition of words and clauses. Just because you think you have the moral high ground does not mean that you will actually win. You have to prepare for the possibility that you may spend a lot of money to end up exactly where you are now or possibly a ruling that the supreme cout ruling isn't interpreted the way you think it should be which gets you into rounds of appeals. At the end of the day it is not your opinion that matters, but the judge's. I say go for it, and you may win, but when you start it you have to be in for the long haul and have a plan in place for what happens if you don't. Too many people go into this believing that they have right ont eir side and are completely blindsided because the jusdge interpretes a clause differetly than they or their lawyers predict. Just have a plan rather than try to use this as a club against the government. You just might have to use it.

    Submit a Comment

    • Username
      Prochoice
      - January 5, 2012 at 09:48:38

      Some people are just so full of hate. There is no chance that a law suit would not be a simple open and shut case. Antichoicers just continue to show ignorance.

  • Username
    hmatt
    - January 5, 2012 at 09:16:16

    The only way to deal with this governments aggroance is to take them to court.

    Submit a Comment

  • Username
    MACDONALDBANK
    - January 5, 2012 at 09:16:07

    Einstein stated in a letter recently auctioned that the bible was a collection of primitive legends. He said believing in God was childish and he as a Jew is no different than another person and not chosen by God. Many theologians state quite correctly that the birth; crucifixion; resurrection and other elements of christianity actually didn’t even happen! How would you like it … if hate speech was directed to your brother or sister as you sat in the pew; spewed by some better than thou religious lunatic with a hateful black book about Leviticus -- under his arm? The pope and churches fully aware that Leviticus 18:22 applies only to priests; refuse to remove this stigma maliciously persecuting gays – and many kids bullied into suicide …! If the black community or women had it written that they should be put to death; how would they like that? According to biblical law, a father can sell his daughter as a slave. This holier than thou – written so there it shall be -- fallacy; must be stopped. It is a criminal offence to cause harm onto others physically or with written items … the bible and torah have been getting away with this for ages.

    Submit a Comment

    • Username
      If you are a bank
      - January 5, 2012 at 09:48:13

      Aren't banks part of the reason that people are poor and the economy is in the tank?

    • Username
      Keep Religion out ogf banking
      - January 6, 2012 at 16:20:08

      Keep religion/anti-religion out of the banking sector. If you are dealing with the economics of this country, stay secular.

    • Username
      What are you talking about
      - January 8, 2012 at 16:43:43

      Who is more holier than thou than a bank?

  • Username
    Sunshine
    - January 5, 2012 at 09:14:11

    There are lots of services that I would like to sue the government for that don't kill anyone in the process .... maybe a children's hospital, more than two aging neurosurgeons, and some orthopedic surgeons to take care of the year and a half wait time and more for a simple knee surgery. All of these things we have to travel off Island for, most of which we pay for ourselves. It's not any different than abortion - except that we require these services to keep us alive. I would rather these than services that kill the unborn. Pregnancy is not a disease - it's survivable.

    Submit a Comment

  • Username
    proud of prro
    - January 5, 2012 at 09:13:47

    ladies... I have not met any of you personally... but you are speaking for a lot of islanders with your actions. Keep on fighting!

    Submit a Comment

    • Username
      Hee Bee
      - January 5, 2012 at 10:01:00

      No, they are speaking only for you who posted that comment. They don't speak for me or my family. Sunshine said it best, rather see our resources for more doctors, better care than suing for an abortion. And if they are successful in suing for this, I will be the first to sue for having to travel to the IWK for my son to receive care.

  • Username
    MACDONALDBANK
    - January 5, 2012 at 09:13:41

    The Right Honourable Prime Minister of Canada Jean Chretien told the Vatican that there was to be no cross erected over the Canadian Parliament buildings figuratively speaking; when the Pope demanded the Prime Minister go against gay rights.

    Submit a Comment

    • Username
      To Hee Bee and others
      - January 6, 2012 at 16:05:46

      Hi Hee Bee, As I said elsewhere, the equivalency people are making between abortions and other procedures that get done off-Island is a false one. The fact is that the Island ALREADY has the trained medical staff AND the equipment to provide abortions (what do you think happens when a pregnant woman requires an emergency abortion because of complications in utero? She's not helicoptered to Halifax.) I sympathize with you and your son's plight (growing up, my brother had severe epilepsy and needed frequent, costly, and exhausting trips to the IWK). But the fact is that the reason the neurological specialists and equipment were not here was about money. Money is NOT the reason why elective abortions aren't provided: it's politics. And that is discriminatory and contravenes the Canada Health Act. That's what makes this different, and what makes it a realistic legal argument.

  • Username
    Island Mom
    - January 5, 2012 at 09:13:29

    The government hopes PRRO sues, so that they can say they are then forced to provide services, saving face with the anti choice voters. There is no honor in our elected officials, they work to keep their job and get a good pension, that's all.

    Submit a Comment

    • Username
      Another Island Mom
      - January 5, 2012 at 16:12:07

      You, Island Mom, are Right On!!!

  • Username
    Matthew
    - January 5, 2012 at 09:12:28

    I know they don't perform abortions in Sussex NB, or Golden BC, both of which are of comparable size to Charlottetown, one would need to travel to a bigger center to get one in those cases, is that against women's rights in those towns, or in any small town that doesn't perform them. Exactly how far can you live from an abortion facility before it's against your rights. They don't perform many medical procedures here, its a small place. I don't remember a court ruling that specified where abortions had to be offered. I'm pro choice, but against government throwing money at anything someone whines about.

    Submit a Comment

    • Username
      bridge fare
      - January 5, 2012 at 09:51:25

      You don't have to pay to leave Sussex.

    • Username
      To bad
      - January 5, 2012 at 09:49:02

      You are a man. Yout opinion doesn't matter here.

    • Username
      To to bad
      - January 5, 2012 at 19:16:20

      I am an unborn. My opinion doesn't matter here.

  • Username
    SheIsland
    - January 5, 2012 at 09:12:03

    Force government's hand so they can save face with anti-choice voters. Our Premier and our Health Minister can go about their regular schedule of pancake breakfasts and highway paving while the young, motived, bright folks of PEI get the real work done. Go get 'em.

    Submit a Comment

  • Username
    BA
    - January 5, 2012 at 09:11:51

    Good idea, take these government fools to court and then kick them out of government through the ballot box.. The conservates need to come on board with this issue with a new leader who can stand up to these schoolyard bullies. Sorry Olive, I like you as a person but you need to hand the leadership over to an individual who can handle these bullies in the Liberal government and kick the Sh** out of them in the election.

    Submit a Comment

  • Username
    bob the builder
    - January 4, 2012 at 21:42:18

    legal action is the only way to get things done with this government, same thing as the sunday shopping

    Submit a Comment

    • Username
      Dana Kenny
      - January 5, 2012 at 09:52:48

      Please reevaluate your statement, do you honestly consider Sunday shopping to be one of your "rights"? Overall your comment sickens me, comparing the life of an unborn child to Sunday shopping is utterly repulsive.

    • Username
      Island Atheist
      - January 6, 2012 at 16:02:54

      So is canned pop.

  • Username
    Shellie Brown
    - January 4, 2012 at 21:42:07

    Dam straight it's discriminatory ! Get this through your bigoted, hypacritical pea brains _ NOONE has Any right to Tell women what to do with Their body . Dam straight with the assistance of BC, PEIslanders will win their case. Good Luck to You'All ! Keep good ties with BC because Islanders do need outside help to protect their Rights.

    Submit a Comment

    • Username
      bob from cardigan
      - January 5, 2012 at 09:55:17

      That's a pretty simplistic view don't you think? I'm not a religious person but I'm smart enough to know that abortion is in effect the killing of a life form. Let's not be so hasty in our views on rights when we refuse to consider the right of the organism that is being formed in the protected environment of a woman's womb. Abortion is a very difficult subject to discuss and it's not as simple as saying a woman's right is the be all and end all, especially when the life form that is being aborted can not express it's opinion. We believe we are so sure of what we are doing now, but I think in the future we will look at this issue in a different light and view as somewhat barbaric and primitive. We go to the ends of the earth to try to save preterm babies but on the other side we go to the ends of the earth to protect a persons right to terminate at the same time.

    • Username
      Bob is wrong
      - January 5, 2012 at 11:56:28

      It is that simple.

Submit a Comment

Submit a Comment

This form is NOT used for emailing the article to a friend. Please use the "Send to a friend" link at the top of the page for that purpose.

The Guardian is not responsible for posted comments. Please be polite and confine your comments to the subject of the posted story. If you have an account, please sign on to it..

(we keep all emails private)
Agreement

We ask that users remain courteous. You may not post insulting, discriminatory or inappropriate content, which may be removed at our discretion. We are not responsible for user content and opinions. Use of this site as well as content submission & ownership are governed by our Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.

Member organizations should be non-profit in nature, and promote legal activities. Any organization found promoting illegal activities or commercial products or services will be deleted from the site.

I agree with these conditions.

Advertising

Expert bloggers

Ride for Heart
Blogger
Heart and Stroke Foundation
Preparation is key
[Sponsored]

More bloggers here

Newsletter

Please enter your email to receive our free newsletter

Subscribe to news alerts
loading...

The Guardian Twitter

Advertising