Abortion from a Sociological Perspective of "Canadian Society"

Abortion from a Sociological Perspective of "Canadian Society"
Abortion is a contentious topic in every society, but it is particularly so in Canada. Even though Canada was the first country to decriminalize abortion in 1988, the government has faced numerous challenges (Costescu et al., 2016). The biggest question on people's minds is whether legalizing abortion in Canada was a peaceful solution to a highly contentious social problem. For different reasons, women still face many challenges when seeking an abortion today. The lack of abortion providers in a country that is supposed to embrace the concept of social justice is a significant obstacle for women who want to end their pregnancies. The provinces have abdicated their responsibilities of ensuring reliable access to abortion services (Tatalovich, 2015). Further, the members of parliament keep debating bills that seek to criminalize abortion. Moreover, laws that determine when, and how the process should be carried out are often discussed in the parliament.

Women who see abortion as a way of controlling own bodies face much discrimination from people who term the act as murder. Since abortion requires a medical procedure, it has been included in the health sector issues but the federal government and local governments still control matters relating to the process (White, 2009). Two contradictory theories exist that govern the thoughts and ideas of people concerning abortion. These theories include the pro-choice and the pro-life arguments of abortion. The current paper will discuss the sociological perspective of abortion in the Canadian community to paint a clear picture of the issue. Further, the paper will discuss the theoretical approach to abortion, the roles of different organizations, the conflicts, and the possible solution with a bias on the pro-life choice side of the argument.

Abortion is a disruptive issue. The conflicts between the pro-life and pro-choice thinkers create a lot of confusion and conflict in the world (White, 2009). However, it is important to note that arguments and fights that arise between pro-life supporters and pro-choice supporters cannot solve the abortion issue in the Canadian community. Sober discussions must be carried out to analyze the needs of the people and the responsibilities of the government through the ministry of health to its people. The societal culture does play a major role in deciding the best approach to the controversial abortion topic. Analyzing the ethical and moral principles that govern the Canadian community can offer the much-needed relief in relation to the abortion issue (Collier & Haliburton, 2015).

Different viewpoints about individual rights, societal representation, moral norms, and roles of women in the society bring about the conflicts surrounding the abortion issue. Pro-choice supporters argue that abortion helps to bring social justice in the society by ensuring that women from all walks of life have equal access to services. In societies that prohibit abortion, only the marginalized women suffer the consequences. The wealthy can acquire the services from various private healthcare facilities but the poverty-stricken women end up in the hands of unqualified doctors or suffer the consequences of bearing an unwanted child (Erdman, Grenon, & Harrison-Wilson, 2008). In pro-choice arguments, women are given the opportunity to decide what to do with their bodies. As such, legalizing abortion puts all women on the same platform and gives the ability to control own bodies. Pro-life supporters argue that life is sacred and the mother should not be allowed to make a choice that would affect another person (the fetus) negatively. Exercising one’s freedom should not be done at the expense of another person’s comfort.

The history of abortion in the Canadian community is a long one. The practice was illegal for a long time but the laws that governed abortion did not take into consideration the safety of the mother’s life. The decriminalization of the practice in 1988 was brought about by the need to save the mother’s life in the case of a complicated pregnancy (Johnston, 2014). Further, the availability of the new technology that allows easy and safe abortion also contributed to the 1988 decision. Canada has always been a step ahead of other nations in handling issues surrounding abortion. The heat of debates had subsided for a while but issues coming up from the closure of New Brunswick’s only abortion clinic have reignited the abortion discussion in Canada. Pro-choice supporters have condemned the act vigorously thus making abortion a mainstream political issue.

The conflicts concerning abortion in Canada can be easily explained through the conflict perspective theory. Social conflict arises when people disagree about goals and values. The Canadian society has been unable to come up with a justifiable or agreeable focus of abortion because the values and morals of the society contradict most of the abortion practices. The sanctity of life and the freedom of choice are two values that have brought a lot of confusion in the abortion matter. Pro-life supporters argue that one should not compromise the rights of other people as he or she seeks to achieve own freedom. Further, pro-choice supporters establish that life is precious and that the life of the fetus should be valued. The abortion supporters prove that those against abortion do not consider the life of the mother in their discussions (Costescu et al., 2016). The discrepancy between the two schools of thoughts has led to the current abortion problems in the Canadian society.

The pro-choice has played an ideal role in simplifying a complex social matter in Canada but with the majority of women being unable to access abortion services, is time to rethink the approach and maybe find a more suitable and applicable way of dealing with the problem. Most public health care facilities today feel the pressure of providing the abortion services without the backup of insurance funding. In fact, some clinics such as the Brunswick closed down citing the inability of the hospital to operate effectively with the limited funds (Johnston, 2014). Regardless of the inclusion of abortion into healthcare policies, people still require referrals to receive the services in public health facilities. Further, the public healthcare organizations offering abortion services are few, which lead people to go to the private clinics that are not insured. To achieve effective implementation of the abortion laws, the federal government must ensure that the service is insured, provided, and regulated like other medical services. However, equating abortion to other medical services raises a lot of issues including those of reproductive justice.

The quality of care is still affected by location and financial capabilities of a person. The argument raised by the pro-life supporters that legalizing abortion will bridge the gap between the quality of care received by the rich and the poor is not practical in Canada today. Most public healthcare facilities are located in urban areas and the financially challenged persons still have to travel for long distances to acquire the services (White, 2009). Further, the lack of insurance services covering abortion procedures makes it hard for the poor to get the services from either public or private organizations.

The stigma associated with abortion has not subsided even after the decriminalization of the process, an indication that dealing with the pregnancy termination problem requires a complete re-set of the societal values, which is not possible (Erdman et al., 2008). A new paradigm needs to be developed to look at the abortion issue from a new perspective. Abortion is still limited in Canada regardless of the decriminalization of the process. Although the federal government does not put any hindrances to the medical procedure, the day-to-day execution of the process depends on the provincial governorship. Various provinces do not have reliable public organizations that can serve the society, especially the people living in rural and remote areas. The debate about the introduction of an abortion pill to serve the needs of the people who cannot afford surgical abortion is the new solution that the pro-choice supporters seek to introduce into the society. However, other than the drug taking too long to be approved, the pro-life supporters have expressed their lack of support for the introduction of a new way of terminating pregnancies in the society.

The issue of abortion is a complex one and has been a point of debate and conflict in the Canadian society. The pro-choice supporters have devised ways to ensure that the services are available to all people but the legalization of abortion has not provided any sustainable solution. The services are still inaccessible to the marginalized people as a result of location and cost factors. Therefore, the Canadian government needs to look for other alternative solutions to the abortion problem by analyzing the pro-life and pro-choice arguments a new to understand what the society needs.

It is necessary to create a range of health settings that directly address the concerns of the women who wish to undertake abortion. This will serve to mitigate the deaths that occur among the members of the marginalized and financially disadvantaged groups due to the lack of access to the appropriate health intervention during and after abortion. According to Patton (2009), the women who are likely to confront barrier to undertaking abortion are “those who are low-income, women-of-color, immigrant or refugee women, and those who do not speak English or French.”

Different viewpoints concerning the issue of abortion in the Canadian community are further the result of one’s social location in the community. For instance, the majority of women in marginalized and indigenous communities may be regarded with loathe given their social locations. In such situations, it is not the view of the individual that leads to such understanding of the abortion, but of the significant part of the community mechanics (Patton, 2009). The social location factor reflects the symbolic interactions theory. As a matter of fact, developing an attitude towards something is generally based on the views which are typical within the community that one lives. A person who was raised in a community or a state that is inclined against abortion is likely to think in concordance with this community, and therefore, negate even a notion of abortion. On the other hand, an individual who was raised in a liberal community is far more likely to accept abortion in the society.

Viewpoints on abortion in Canada are also influenced by the interaction processes between the citizens. Symbolic interactions seek to create meaning based on the interactions of the members of the community. For instance, prior to the establishment of the Criminal Law Amendment Act of 1969, abortion was illegal act in Canada (Kaposy, 2010). The majority of the citizens also disapproved abortion. However, the legalization of the operation created room for new points of view with regards to abortion. Consequently, by the year 2005, it is estimated that over 90% of the abortion operations had been overseen in the country involved the Canadian residents (Kaposy, 2010). This gives room for debates about the influences of such a symbolic interaction with regards to abortion in Canada. Validation of abortion was a consequence of increased interactions between members of the Canadian community and other global residents in the era of globalization.

All things considered, abortion is still a controversial issue in Canada. However, several social factors have played an immense role in mitigating the criticism that was extended towards abortion in the past. Nonetheless, it is still a disruptive issue as it inspires conflict between the Canadian people. Pro-life and pro-choice arguments have often ben fronted as a political issue. This creates animosity and conflict in the subject community. Alternatively, the quality of care that is extended to the aborting party is often determined by their social locations. Consequently, women from marginalized communities are less likely to receive quality care than women of Canadian heritages. This is further a culmination of financial constraints. Contrasting points of view on abortion are also a result of interactions in the community. Symbolic interactions theory reinforces the development of one’s viewpoint from the interaction process that they engage. Therefore, the increased validation of abortion in the Canadian society is a consequence of the increased interactions that members of the subject communities have with other individuals on a global scale. The government should work closely with other stakeholders to establish appropriate measures to be engaged in allowing marginalized individuals access to healthy abortion.



References

Collier, C. & Haliburton, R. (2015). Bioethics in Canada: A philosophical introduction. Toronto: Canadian Scholars' Press Inc.

Costescu, D., Guilbert, E., Bernardin, J., Black, A., Dunn, S., Fitzsimmons, B., Norman, W. V., Pymar, H., Soon, J., Trouton, K., Wagner, M. S., Wiebe, E., Gold, K., Murray, M. È., Winikoff, B., & Reeves, M. (2016). Medical abortion. The Society of Obstetricians and Gynecologists of Canada, 38 (4), 366-389.

Erdman, J., Grenon, A. & Harrison-Wilson, L. (2008). Medication abortion in Canada: A Right-to-health perspective. American Journal of Public Health, 98(10), 1764–1769.

Johnston, R. (2014). The politics of abortion in New Brunswick. Open Journal Systems, 36 (2), 67-92.

Kaposy, C. (2010). Improving abortion access in Canada. Health Care Anal, 18, 17-34.

Patton, N. (2006). Pro-choice or no-choice? Midwifery led abortion care in Canada. Canadian Journal of Midwifery Research and Practice, 8(2), 29-30.

Tatalovich, W. (2015). The politics of abortion in the United States and Canada: A comparative study. Hoboken: Taylor and Francis.

White, J. (2009). Contemporary moral problems. Australia United States: Thomson Wadsworth.