Abortion Laws in Canada and the Media

Abortion Laws in Canada and the Media

By the end of the 19^th century, abortion was legally restricted in many countries. Canada was one of the countries that restricted abortion and had banned it in 1869, and anyone who committed the crime was sentenced to life imprisonment. The country has had a long history around the issue of abortion with various people saying that it should be allowed while others believe that it should not and that it should be illegal (McCullough, 2020). Canada is one of the few countries that has no criminal law restricting abortion. Despite this, women exercise their right to abort responsibly and safely. The portrayal of abortion in the media can greatly change the perception of the public and can also impact policy agendas. When the media gives honest and accurate information concerning the issue of abortion, then a worldwide outrage at violations of women’s rights can arise. The media portrays the issue of abortion in many ways, and the effects of this can be either positive or negative. This paper argues that abortion is a major topic of controversy, and the media portrays the issue related to abortion right more positively that is the actual case.

At the beginning of the 1960s, the pressure to legalize abortion started to rise from legal and medical professionals, and social justice groups. Due to the public outrage, in 1967, the federal government summoned the Royal Commission on the Status of Women and in 1969, contraception was decriminalized, and abortion was made legal (Wood, 2018). Even after abortion was made legal, the availability of abortion varied by province. Abortion clinics continued facing criticism while others were even closed. Later on in 1988, “the Supreme Court of Canada struck down the abortion law claiming that is conflicted with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, specifically Section 7 (Everyone has the right to life and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice)” (The History of Abortion in Canada. Arcc-cdac.ca. 2020) As mentioned, Canada has not had any national abortion law to regulate abortion at a federal level. However, it is covered by federal criminal jurisdiction and also by provincial health care laws, and this makes the issue of abortion both politically and constitutionally sensitive.

With the recent rise in the media’s involvement in covering certain topics of discussion, abortion has become one of the most controversial topics in relation to media coverage. In most cases, the media seems to be more on the side of fighting for abortion rights. Yet, in recent interviews conducted on various journalists, it was found that most of these journalists face stigmatization and political opposition when seeking to report positively on abortion (Archer, 2020). This shows that even journalists unintentionally pick-up and repeat anti-abortion myths, language and imagery, which are then taken to the media and to the public. In most cases, the right to abort is associated with women’s rights. Canadian women have always demanded equal rights and women’s rights. As a result, many women, who have been on the positive side of abortion, have always claimed that it is their right to decide whether or not they want to abort.

Currently, Canada does not have any legal restrictions on abortion. This is mainly because abortion laws have never been effective in reducing or putting an end to abortion in Canada. Recent studies show that the rates of abortion in countries that have abortion laws and those that do not have are almost the same (Naden 2007). There other cases where countries that have legal restrictions on abortion experience higher rates of abortion compared to countries that do not have these restrictions. According to a report by the Canada government in 2005, the overall rate of abortion in Canada was approximately 14%, and this was less than the 20% cases reported in the United States, which has tough restrictions on abortion (Nanden 2007).

Abortion laws are put in place to discourage people from carrying out an abortion. However, most of these restrictive abortion laws have no positive outcomes in reducing cases and the rate of abortion. In countries where abortion is allowed, such as Canada, the rate of abortion is considerably less than in countries where abortion laws are in effect. In Canada, since the use of contraception arose, cases of abortion have reduced.

In Canada, resistance against abortion is mainly from churches and religious organizations who claim that abortion is murder, and it should be a crime. Since a huge portion of Canada’s population is Catholic, which is the foundation of Canada, conservative and religiously-influenced policies have been very common (Friedland, 2003). Therefore, Canada’s deep religious roots have influenced the policies formed relating to the issue of abortion. It is not surprising that some if not most of the abortion-rights activists see journalists as their allies in the fight for abortion rights. Many newspapers actually support abortion rights. On such an emotional issue as abortion, some opponents on each side expect the media, represented by the reporters and journalists to allow their personal beliefs to dominate over their professional obligation to be just and unbiased. Most of these reporters and journalists report that they do not let this happen. However, abortion opponents insist that the media’s biasness manifests itself in all forms of media communication such as the newspapers, television, and the internet. Study on some of the major newspapers, TV, and newsmagazine coverage, including over 100 interviews and with activists on both sides of the debate on abortion confirm that this bias actually exists (Shaw, 2020). Many journalists try to be fair when it comes to talking about abortion and as a result, many charges if bias remains invalid. However, careful examination of different stories published and broadcast show scores that can be categorized as unfair to the opponents of abortion. For instance, the media uses language and visual images that frame the whole debate on abortion in a way that covertly favor abortion-rights advocates. Additionally, the advocates of abortion rights are quoted more frequently and more favorably characterized than the opponents of abortion. As if that is not enough, events or issues that support or are favorable to abortion challengers are often ignored or given little attention by the media. It can be noted that the media, is somehow more supportive of the abortion rights advocates and supporters and in a way, less supportive of the abortion opponents.

The media continues to support abortion, arguing that abortion rights view that there is no human life to be “helped” before birth. As a result, the media uses the term “fetus” instead of “baby” when talking about abortion. They argue that before birth, a fetus is only a fetus until birth when it now becomes a baby. Research shows that abortion is essentially a class issue in Canada and in the United States where people with more money and education, and the less religious a person is, the more likely they are to support abortion rights. Most big-city journalists are well paid, have a good education, and are less religious compared to the general public, and as a result, they are more likely to favor abortion rights. Some journalists also feel like they need to present the anti-abortion arguments alongside the abortion advocates and supporters case, to maintain balance. As a result, some of the interview, both the supporters and opponents of abortion in attempts to show neutrality. However, the viewpoints of the abortion advocates, who are also known as the pro-choice, seem inherently balanced as the viewpoints of this group respect the rights of women to decide what is best for them. Denying women their rights is not neutrality.

In some cases, reporters often dramatize cases related to abortion to make the stories newsworthy, and as a result, they unintentionally repeat myths and misconceptions around abortion. As identified in a 2010 analysis of seven British and five Scottish newspapers, abortion was continually presented as a physically and emotionally risk procedure (Purcell, Hilton, & McDaid, 2014). This is not true as research by the World Health Organization proves that abortion is one of the safest processes when performed by a trained professional. Additionally, the self-administration of approved abortion pills is also safe. Instead of overstressing the harms of unsafe abortion, the media should concentrate on the more pressing issue of different states refusing to make abortion legal and acceptable, which leads to more serious issues of women and girls turning to dangerous options of unsafe abortion.

As seen, the media is responsible for advancing the bias that exists in abortion and also some of the myths that are associated with abortion. The media has the capability to either positively or negatively affect abortion. The reality is that abortion when performed by trained professionals, is one of the safest ways of terminating a pregnancy. Women often find themselves becoming pregnant without planning to get pregnant or when they are not ready mainly due to financial constraints and as a result want to terminate the pregnancy so that they can plan their lives better and get a child when they are finally ready. Therefore, most women see abortion laws that restrict them from aborting as a violation of women’s rights. Most believe that they should have a right to know whether or not they want to keep the baby since they are responsible for their own reproductive health. The media, while supporting abortion right, mostly makes it seem like abortion is a complicated process while in reality, it is an ordinary healthcare procedure that can be easily performed by a professional. The media should, therefore, use imagery that emphasizes the abortion procedure as normal healthcare so that women wishing to abort can comfortably visit abortion clinics and get abortion services from professional practitioners. Finally, many reporters and journalists often seek personal experiences of women that have had an abortion to illustrate what is at stake more strongly. However, abortion rights are a collective issue, and therefore, the case for these rights cannot rest on an individual story (Archer, 2020). The media should reflect the complications of abortion experiences. Ill-informed stories by the media can hide the truth about abortion in both public and political arenas, and therefore, journalists should stick to facts and normalize the experience of abortion.

In conclusion, it is clear that abortion is a serious topic affecting women in contemporary society. Media coverage on abortion has a huge impact on the attitudes and viewpoints of various people, whether they are on the negative or positive side of the issue. Debates are still ongoing on whether Canada should enact legal restrictions on abortion and as a result, varied opinions from different groups have come up. There is no major reason as to why Canada should legalize abortion since currently, the lack of restrictions against abortion is doing more good than harm. The media, instead of concentrating more on trying to balance between anti-abortion arguments and advocacy on abortion, should concentrate more on debunking myths related to the issue and normalizing abortion so that the public can accept abortion more positively and getting an abortion can become normalized. This way, the stigmatization on abortion will also reduce, and people will be able to receive healthy and safe abortion services without any fear.

References

Archer, N. (2020). Who benefits from sensationalized media coverage of abortion? Hint: not women, whose lives are at stake. openDemocracy. Retrieved 12 March 2020, from https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/5050/sensationalised-media-coverage-of-abortion/.

Friedland, M. L. (2003). Criminal Justice in Canada Revisisted. Crim. LQ, 48, 419.

McCullough, J. (2020). Why is Canada so afraid of debating abortion?. Washington post. Retrieved 13 March 2020, from https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/05/30/why-is-canada-so-afraid-debating-abortion/.

Purcell, C., Hilton, S., & McDaid, L. (2014). The stigmatization of abortion: a qualitative analysis of print media in Great Britain in 2010. Culture, health & sexuality, 16(9), 1141-1155.

Shaw, D. (2020). Abortion And The Media. Groups.csail.mit.edu. Retrieved 12 March 2020, from http://groups.csail.mit.edu/mac/users/rauch/nvp/media/shaw1.html.

The History of Abortion in Canada. Arcc-cdac.ca. (2020). Retrieved 13 March 2020, from https://www.arcc-cdac.ca/postionpapers/60-History-Abortion-Canada.pdf.

Wood, W. (2018). Abortion: History, Politics, and Reproductive Justice after Morgentaler ed. by Shannon Stettner, Kristin Burnett, and Travis Hay. The Canadian Historical Review, 99(4), 676-677.