One of the most famous Supreme Court cases in pro-life circles is that of Winnipeg Child and Family Services v.D.F.G. It is the "Dred Scott" case of Canadian jurisprudence, and declared:
The law of Canada does not recognize the unborn child as a legal person possessing rights.
Winnipeg Child and Family Services was seeking to protect an unborn child from the effects of the mother's glue-sniffing. As it was, the mother had already given birth to two disabled children who were now wards of the state, having had suffered the consequences of their mother's addiction.
The feminists, of course, are thrilled with this decision. Because, after all, it's only the woman who matters. If a baby has to suffer and die in the name of female empowerment and autonomy, well just too bad!. "Fetuses are not that important" as Joyce Arthur says. If drugging a fetus results in a disabled baby, ah well. Tough luck. She can drug herself to her heart's content. The baby can just die for all they care.
Now, those crazy rednecks-- the Dutch-- decided to place a pregnant women under government supervision because there was some doubt about the safety of the domestic situation. This according to an abstract I found on PubMed:
In the Netherlands it is possible to place a foetus under formal supervision after 24 weeks gestation. This may prevent hospitalization of a healthy newborn in an unhealthy environment which is poor in stimuli. It also prevents the stressful situation that may arise when parents threaten to take their newborn child from the hospital, pending the inquiry into the domestic situation.
Those crazy fetus-fetishizing Dutch. They actually care about the health of the unborn (at least the wanted ones), and do not assume that the only person's interests who matters is the woman's.
They legally recognized that the fetus has interests, but abortion is still legal.No anti-feminist apocalypse has ensued. Whodda thunk.
For more social conservative news check out BigBlueWave.ca
