START A PETITION 25,136,189 members: the world's largest community for good
922,619 people care about Women's Rights

What If You Could Only Get an Abortion If Two Doctors Approved It?

What If You Could Only Get an Abortion If Two Doctors Approved It?

Imagine you discover you are pregnant. You have young children already, you’re struggling to make ends meet as it is. You have just begun a new job that you love and can see yourself at for a long time, and your kids are finally all in school, making it possible for you to focus on work. You have no desire to go through another pregnancy, you don’t want to give birth, you know your family is complete.

You are sure about your decision that you want to get an abortion. The question is, will not one but two doctors agree to allow you to have one?

For those who live in New Brunswick, Canada, that’s the situation they must face now that Morgentaler Clinic in Fredericton is closing down. Although abortion is allowed in Canada, in this particular province a restriction was placed on the procedure that bans Canadian health insurance from paying for it unless it is done in a hospital, and with the approval of two doctors who have declared it a “medical necessity.”

For most pregnant people, this is a severe financial hardship, and one that the Morgenthaler Clinic had long been helping them overcome. They have been providing non-medically indicated abortions for decades, for low cost or even for free for those who have requested them, declaring that a person’s right to terminate a pregnancy should not be hampered by whether or not she could afford to have the procedure done.

That was the mission of Dr. Henry Morgenthaler, a Canadian abortion rights pioneer, who died just last year. As a physician he spent years in jail as a protest of the country’s restrictive abortion laws, which lead to the eventual ruling that legalized abortion throughout the country in 1988. “I decided to break the law to provide a necessary medical service because women were dying at the hands of butchers and incompetent quacks, and there was no one there to help them,” he told his biographer, talking about his early illegal abortions. “The law was barbarous, cruel and unjust. I had been in a concentration camp, and I knew what suffering was. If I can ease suffering, I feel perfectly justified in doing so.”

With the Fredericton Morgenthaler clinic closing, however, those in the New Brunswick province would have no choice but to leave the area and go to a different province if they wanted to end a pregnancy, unless they could convince the hospital that it was medically necessary.  That left those who believe in a person’s right to an abortion with two choices — try to reopen the clinic, or try to change the law.

Activists are of course doing both. Reproductive Justice New Brunswick, a new pro-abortion rights activist group, launched an online fundraising campaign to gather enough funding to lease the building, at least for a while, and keep abortion accessible to all pregnant people in the province seeking it. To do so, they must raise $100,000 by the end of July, and as of July 15th they had over $70,000 pledged. Thanks to a large batch of positive media coverage, nearly $20,000 of that came in about 24 hours.

Still, leasing the clinic isn’t enough. The original clinic closed as it finally lost its ability to handle the massive amount of free or low cost procedures it provided, simply because the pregnant people in the province couldn’t use their insurance like they could in other parts of the country. Changing that in New Brunswick is key to giving people back the ability to control when and if they give birth.

That’s the harder part, and it’s one Reproductive Justice New Brunswick is taking on as well. “We started lobbying efforts; we tried to have conversations with the New Brunswick government and with the opposite leaders of the Liberals,” Reproductive Justice NB member Kathleen Pye told The “We realized they’re just not interested, at all. We weren’t getting any calls back.”

It’s a struggle we’ve seen repeatedly here in the United States, where our clinics are closing left and right and abortion access has all but disappeared in many areas of the country. In the U.S., too, we are told that abortion will always be “available,” but what that word means varies drastically from state to state and region to region.

Are we in the U.S. nearing the point where an abortion can only be obtained in a hospital and with two doctors to approve it? Not quite. If we do get there, let’s hope we battle it just as fiercely as our neighbors to the north are doing.


Read more: , , , , , ,

Photo credit: Thinkstock

have you shared this story yet?

some of the best people we know are doing it


+ add your own
9:28AM PDT on Aug 7, 2014

Wow..I thought that these comments were to state your stance on the issue..You three have turned this into your own chat room!! You should use either e-mail or a chat to argue with each other. This is shameful!

9:57AM PDT on Aug 1, 2014

I agree that nobody needs to fling insults. Considering that many have flung insults, I also think one cannot come to any conclusion based on insults or etiquette. That leaves only the substance related to the article.

In order to care about any issue, one doesn't have to be part of a group affected by that issue. For example we are not animals but we all care about animals; a lot of men care about women's rights and a lot of straight people care about LGBT rights.

So getting back to this topic & looking at the substance alone: Rainbow's original points that spurred this argument in the first place, (in particular the comment @6:38PM PDT on Jul 23, 2014 "Robin T. it will become an issue when your doctor is a religious nut and lets you bleed out even if you need an abortion." ) still stand unrebutted.

9:45AM PDT on Aug 1, 2014

Just have to have the last word don't you? Yes, you DO want to be the victor. I'm outta' here so feel free to have as many last words as you wish. Peace, cheers, chimo, may the force be with you....etc.

3:42PM PDT on Jul 31, 2014

If you actually mean “everyone” why have you yet to address anyone else?

If “hogging” was your problem why didn’t you say so, instead of saying “don’t disrespect King Kevin”?

If you don’t care about abortion/women’s rights why are you here? The only other reason is to defend friends despite rational to the contrary.

8:31PM PDT on Jul 30, 2014

I said .... NOBODY .... that means EVERYONE!

As for addressing YOU originally, when I clicked on this, blog you seemed to have a lot of posts - about 70 out of approximately 170 postings since July 22 @5:55. That is hogging the topic just a wee bit & seems to indicate something akin to a rant. Sorry to say that but feel free to count them.

As for trying to calm things down, I don't even give a shit about abortion per se since I'm an old fart plus I am celibate. The original reason I commented in the last couple of days at all was to point out.... as a nurse... that medically, tubal libations can be reversed, regardless of the success of the procedure. Only when checking back did I find the nasty turn of events. Let's ALL just move along.

4:37PM PDT on Jul 30, 2014

If nobody needs to fling insults then why are you only addressing me? I never declared myself victor and have no need, nor ever intimated such. Only facts prove themselves.

For the sake of “peace” should we just take what is dished out?

2:45PM PDT on Jul 30, 2014

I'm just trying to be a peacemaker. NOBODY needs to fling insults or side with someone just because they're a "friend". Nobody can declare themselves a "victor" in a fight as long as they leave behind hard feelings & broken teeth. Why does there HAVE to be a victor? How about just calling a truce? That's all. Don't blow a dove out of the sky for carrying a request for a truce.
As I said boys & girls, it's summer, enjoy the sun. I just spent 2 hours playing music with friends. Much more relaxing than this.

2:30PM PDT on Jul 30, 2014

When Kevin flung insults at me [without answering the questions nor the point] how do you surmise I am the one with the anger problem?

As Suba pointed out, I won’t defend an irrational stance just to support friends either. Nor should anyone.

BTW, I already had walked away and left the “playground”, when you brought the issue back up.

8:10AM PDT on Jul 30, 2014

Rainbow, respectfully, I think it is time to back off & cool down for a while. Don't take every statement as a personal affront. I haven't been following this particular topic for a while but it appears it has turned very venomous. PLEASE, anger accomplishes nothing. I hope everyone bickering here would just take a deep breath, mow the lawn, wash the car & relax for a while. Nobody deserves a seemingly endless attack for several days.
Diane had the courage to reveal very painful things in her life. Whether you agree with everything she says or believes is irrelevant at present. Your comments have become hurtful.
Now you are calling Kevin, "King Kevin". I respect him immensely. Chill.
Would you just extend an olive branch. OK, we are overreacting here & for my part in letting this get out of hand say, "I apologize?" You might just find it will heal wounds on all sides. Whether you are right or whether you are wrong, just say, "Let's move on". It takes a bigger person to let go & walk away than to insist on winning.

4:23PM PDT on Jul 29, 2014

Thought I was done with this thread but just wanted to clear up any misunderstandings, and reiterate what I said earlier (and via PM).

While I love my friends, I would never support an ideology I don't believe in against my principles just to defend a friend. Never have. I judge an argument only by its content, NOT by who made it, how it was said or how many insults it contained. (Obviously I cannot take sides based on friendship, considering all involved in this argument are my friends. )

All I did in this situation is to support the POSITION I believe in, which is: protecting individual freedoms (particularly womens rights) against interference from government or religion.

If anyone disagrees with any ideology I strongly believe in, I would argue with them regardless of whether they are friends or not. Granted an argument is more enjoyable when its NOT with a friend, but there's never a reason to lose a friendship over a mere argument. This forum is made for debate after all.

add your comment

Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may not reflect those of
Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.

Recent Comments from Causes

Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Lyndon Baines Johnson, and Barrack Obama are the Top 3 as far as domestic…

P.S. to my earlier comment... Watch THIS video of chimps seeing sun for first time (starting at .54…

Vote every one of the obstructionists out of office this November. Vote Progressive! We have the…

meet our writers

Julie M. Rodriguez Julie M. Rodriguez is an arts, green living, and political writer based in San Mateo, CA. Her work... more
Story idea? Want to blog? Contact the editors!
ads keep care2 free

more from causes

Select names from your address book   |   Help

We hate spam. We do not sell or share the email addresses you provide.