Thank you very much. I too am very humbled by the co-presenters I have the honour to present alongside.
Thank you very much for inviting our federation to make a presentation today. We really appreciate the opportunity to deliver our point of view. In my presentation, I will address the topic of abortion in the context of the recent confirmation of the fact that the Government of Canada will not be financing such services as part of its maternal and child health initiative at the G8 Summit.
I will first explain why abortion services are inseparable from maternal and child health in general. I will close by explaining why the strategy of refusing funding for abortion services is ineffective.
First, abortion is a fundamental component of maternal health. A false distinction is often made between abortion and maternal health. It is as if the women who chose abortion and mothers were different women. But we forget that mothers are often the ones who need abortion services. There is also a lack of understanding of the link between abortion and child health. In reality, more than 220,000 children lose their mothers each year due to unsafe abortions. So it is a lot more likely that, without their mothers, those children will die.
In addition to children who suffer as a result of losing their mothers, it would be inhuman to deny women in poorer countries those essential services. The majority of the 42 million abortions performed around the world annually take place in developing countries. Approximately 70,000 women die each year due to unsafe abortions.
That means seven women die per hour every year from unsafe abortions.
Five million women are hospitalized because of complications resulting from unsafe abortion and this number does not even include the other three million women who do not have access to a hospital. The complications those women are experiencing can have short-term and long-term consequences that would cost their governments more money than funding safe abortion services.
In Canada, and in most developed or rich countries, we have access to safe abortion services. These services, in addition to being essential health care services, meet women's need to be in control of their bodies and, therefore, of their lives. Refusing to recognize that fundamental need perpetuates not only a flagrant injustice between women from the south and women from the north, but also denies women their universal rights.
Canadian and Quebec women have fought for these rights. We must not allow our government to dictate to women from poorer countries what they can and cannot do with their own bodies.
I'll move on to my second point, which is simply that refusing to finance abortions abroad does not actually reduce the rate of abortions.
We can learn a number of key lessons from former President George Bush's reinstatement of the Mexico City policy, also commonly called the “global gag rule”, the policy that denied U.S. aid funding to NGOs that performed abortions, provided counsel and references related to such services, or lobbied for the legalization of abortion in their country. U.S. aid was even cut off from organizations that used non-U.S. funding for these activities.
Its main lesson is, to repeat, that refusing to finance abortion services abroad does not actually reduce their frequency. When legal and safe abortion services become less available, the only thing that changes is that women seek out unsafe procedures or try to self-abort, and these procedures often occur under unsanitary and dangerous conditions. Refusing to fund safe abortion procedures therefore bolsters the rate of maternal death, infection, and long-term consequences, such as infertility. Let us remember that 13% of maternal deaths across the world are due to unsafe abortions. The most effective way to reduce abortions is to reduce the number of unintended pregnancies. The way to achieve this is to increase the availability of family planning initiatives that include abortion services.
Why include these services?
It's because contraception alone is not enough. It often takes decades for contraception to be broadly introduced and accepted, meaning that abortion continue to be an important recourse. Reliable access to contraception is also nearly impossible for some of the world's poorest women, including adolescents, refugees, victims of sexual coercion or violence, or those suffering from chronic illnesses, such as HIV/AIDS. Even where contraception is broadly available, abortion services continue to be needed, because no contraceptive method is 100% effective.
The global gag rule also teaches us that refusing to finance NGOs that provide abortion-related services only interrupts, complicates, or even shuts down family planning programs. In other words, cutting off funding from abortion-related services weakens maternal health initiatives. Faced with restrictions placed on funding during the global gag rule, numerous NGOs concluded that it would be unethical for them to cut any mention of abortion out of their family planning programs. They were therefore cut off from U.S. aid, causing many to reduce their staff power and their services and to even close clinics.
We should note that the global gag rule even applied in countries where abortion was legal, meaning that the global gag represented an affront on poorer countries' sovereignty. It also undermined the promotion of democracy abroad, notably the fundamental democratic principle of free speech and open public debate.
Finally, while the global gag rule affected women on the international stage, it was part of a broader strategy to diminish the rights of women domestically and abroad, sometimes called “Bush's other war”, the war on women's reproductive and sexual rights.
In conclusion, a maternal heath initiative that includes contraception but not abortion will be insufficient in helping women.
We must remember that the principles of free choice and self-determination are shared by most Canadians. In April 2010, an EKOS poll showed that the majority of Canadians are pro-choice. They know that, even if we do not want to use abortion services ourselves, these services must be available to women who need them.
I urge you to use your privileged status and influence to encourage the Conservative government to change its position on funding for abortion services abroad.
Thank you very much.