Gilbert: We need to change the abortion conversation — it's about equal rights

What did the US Supreme Court officially do on Friday? Roe v. We knew we were coming since the leak of the draft decision at Wade. It ended the constitutional protection against abortion. While this decision casts an ominous shadow on the United States, the devastating extent of the pro-life activist's victory extends to Canada.

As we are preparing for an unwelcome conversation to revisit the issues resolved in this country, we need to advance a new paradigm for defining the right to abortion.

In Canada, the right to abortion was described as the right to make decisions based on one's values ​​and interests. Under our Charter of Rights and Freedom, abortion has so far been positioned within a bunch of interests under Section 7: Physical integrity and personal decision-making. We must change the story: the right to reproduction is the right to equality between women and transgender.

One of the cool aspects of Judge Samuel Alito's sneaky decision at the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organizationis the argument that abortion is a matter of women's equal rights. Is that he casually rejected. According to him, "... the state's abortion regulations are not gender classifications and are not subject to the" tightly monitored "applicable to such classifications. "... the goal of preventing abortion does not constitute discriminatory discrimination against women," he declares. This is a shocking and ridiculous conclusion. Denying women access to medical procedures that have a fundamental impact on physical and mental health and force pregnancy without controlling future plans is not discrimination against women (including men). , How can you plausibly claim? In female biology).

Restricted access to abortion has a direct impact on women's full participation in public life, forcing them to become mere vessels for childbirth. increase. In fact, in Dobbs, the objection is keenly aware that the court's ruling means "... from the moment of fertilization, women have no right to talk about
."

Looking primarily at women's values ​​related to motherhood, the stereotype that women's whereabouts are at home persists. The result of forcing a pregnancy to maturity is to bear the physical, emotional and financial costs of a woman being born in the womb. This cost is for men who can fully participate in public life without fear of being separated from the workforce due to men's biology or being physically altered in serious ways over months. Not evenly distributed by. Punishing half of a conceptual partnership with significant consequences is inherently unequal, and the other half has nothing.

The Roe v. Wade case in Canada wasRv in 1988. Morgentaler decision.It was not discussed as a case of equal rights. However, Judge Bertha Wilson, the only woman on the bench when the case was decided, understood the sexism inherent in abortion restrictions. Develop a series of legislative amendments to put women in the same position as men in the world of men.

The framework for the right to abortion as a woman's right to equality takes the conversation in a new direction. You can discuss how to improve the condition of many problems related to sex education, contraception, fertility treatment, pregnancy, childbirth, childcare, family support and many other parenting issues. Conversations do not have to be just about abortion, but they cannot happen without the recognition that the right to abortion is a necessary right of equality.

Daphne Gilbertis a professor of law at the University of Ottawa and a board member of two international reproductive judiciary organizations.Women Help WomenandFòs Feminista Canada