A Letter to My MP

Mainly for friends' reference, I'm posting below the possibly-too-wordy missive I sent to my MP regarding Motion 312, put forward by the MP one riding over from mine, the thinly veiled goal of which was to re-criminalize the legal and often medically warranted procedure of pregnancy termination. This despite the fact that the current Prime Minister of Canada, of whose party this MP is a member, is on the record multiple times as stating that his government will not re-open any debate on this topic.

I was pleasantly surprised to find my MP on record as having responded to other constituents that he did not support this motion, as logged at RadicalHandmaids.com, along with other responses from MPs.

A commenter pointed out that she thought Mr. Braid's response stopped short of stating he would vote against this, however, I thought his refusal to support implied that. Even so, I wanted to author my own letter to my MP, to indicate that I appreciate his stand on this and to make it clear how I would expect MY parliamentary representative to vote on this.  For reference, here it is. Apologies for the format weirdness.

Dear Mr. Braid;

I am writing you with regard to the current Motion 312 before Parliament, the motion being to form a committee to supposedly study the status of a fetus as a "human being", put forward by your colleague Mr. Woodworth. I appreciate that the internet has publicized some indications that you do not support this motion, however, I am wanting to add my voice to those calling for this idea to be shut down as an ill-thought attempt to bring an individual ideological agenda to some federal legislative recognition. I would also call on you to be even more clear about your intended vote on this issue. I am your constituent, and I and others in Kitchener-Waterloo are not clear that you have indicated how you would vote on this motion before Parliament, only that you "support your government" and refer to Prime Minister Harper's statements of record that he will not re-open "the abortion issue".

I understand that you personally may have views on these questions, as do I, however, I do not believe re-opening a long-studied and settled question, which ultimately can only lead to restrictions on womens' access to medical resources, can be productive. I would prefer my government spend its time on issues truly in federal scope and universally beneficial to all Canadians.

Motion 312 is fundamentally, and possibly deliberately, flawed in its conflagration of the biological status of a human individual and legal personhood in the view of a state. One is not the other and we have many situations in which we do not consider them 100% equivalent.

The motion raises questions long answered by the Supreme Court of Canada, which do not need re-answering. Proceeding from this motion can produce some terrible consequences, not the least of which is a return to days when women in desperate circumstances poisoned, injured, or endangered themselves by either attempting to terminate without medical care, OR by carrying an ill-advised pregnancy for fear of the legal ramifications of not doing so.

The motion also starts down the slippery slope to potential criminal prosecution of not just women for their individual acts and circumstances during pregnancy, but of midwives, doctors, and other medical professionals for their involvement in a pregnancy that does not proceed to plan. Circumstances arise in a significant percentage of pregnancies which may present risk to the fetus, including procedures meant to save a pregnancy, fetus, or woman which may have no guarantee of complete success. It is accepted medical and legal convention that the health and well being of a pregnant woman is paramount. Changing that via legislation moves a large number of medical procedures into a gray area of possibly prosecutable offenses.

Terminating a pregnancy can be a terrible choice but it is occasionally the best outcome for a variety of personal, medical, psycho-social and socio-economic factors. The way to continue to reduce the (already decreasing) incidence of pregnancy termination is to reduce and eliminate the circumstances in which an individual might find it the necessary outcome, which include poverty, lack of education, social pressure within a community, lack of support and resource for all families, abuse of women by partners or families, and poor health resources for women in all circumstances.

Ultimately, however, it needs to be recognized that the body of an individual is sovereign, and a pregnant individual is foremost an individual, though one in a unique state of giving of their own body to support a dependent other. This cannot be forced, required, or legislated of anyone, any more than an individual can be forced into organ or blood donation, even when another's life depends on it. To be giving of one's person to sustain another life requires fully informed consent, and it is a tenet of informed consent that it is revocable as well. These principles could stand to make any proposed debate on fetal personhood moot, but only after wasting a great deal of time and resources on the topic.

I hope you can continue to represent Kitchener-Waterloo in a manner acknowledging the diversity of views in your community and focus your efforts on our collective good through trade, business, infrastructure, and financial matters that best suit the whole of Canada, all its present citizens and their freedoms. Thank you for your consideration.