Back to the Beginning: Bill C-484

I had originally meant to do an in-depth, piece-by piece study on Bill C-484, the Unborn Victims of Crime Act. However, in my research of the Bill, I have decided I would much rather let you read the information first-hand. I wouldn't want to inadvertently misinform on the issue.

http://www.kenepp.com/issues/insidepage.asp?ID=92

This is Ken Epp's personal response to a letter he recieved concerning his Bill. I find it addresses all of the issues surrounding it in a complete and methodic manner.

I should warn you, I am about to share my opinion of the Bill. I hope that you will make your own conclusions and seek out true facts regardless of what I think. If there is one thing I have learned through looking into this issue, it is that we must always guard ourselves against misinformation to avoid ignorance.

I think that Bill C-484 is what it says it is: an effort to protect pregnant women. Although I am srongly ProLife, I understand that abortion is not what this Bill is dealing with. It is worded clearly and with careful precision so that there can be no mistaking this.

Personally, I had no idea that there was no sort of legal protection for pregnant women under canadian law. I think this should be repaired, especially considering there have been precedent cases where a law such as that proposed by the Bill could have been applied. This would also perhaps serve to deter potential offenders.

But read up on it for yourself!

Two Charges of Homicide

As I previously stated, there are many concerns regarding Bill C-484. Just one on the list is the worry of charging someone who has killed a pregnant woman with two homicides. The argument behind this is that it implicitly gives personhood status to the unborn, which is not applied currently under Canadian law.

As it turns out, this, at least, is a misconception. For the killing of the mother, the murderer would be charged as is normal under law presently, but there would not be a second charge of homicide for the unborn. The second charge would be a lesser charge, applied in the case where the killer knew (or should have known due to the obvious shape of the woman) that the victim was pregnant. Ken Epp, the creator of the Bill, also says that his Bill should only apply in the case of a wanted child, one whom the mother has decided against aborting(http://www.kenepp.com/issues/insidepage.asp?ID=92).

Bill C-484: What is it REALLY about?

The first issue I'd like to follow is the proposed Bill C-484, the Unborn Victims of Crime Act.

There has been a lot of controversy surrounding this Bill because of the abortion debate, and many on the Pro-Choice side of the issue feel it is a back-door way of criminalizing abortion in Canada. Is this a real threat?

Bill C-484 was introduced by Kenn Epp. The summary states that "This enactment amends the Criminal Code by making it an offence to injure, cause the death of or attempt to cause the death of a child before or during its birth while committing or attempting to commit an offence against the mother." (from http://www2.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?Docid=3127600&file=4 , I would encourage you to read the Bill in its entirety)

I can see why those for abortion take issue. At first glance, this Bill seems to be implying that the unborn child is a person, which would most certainly be problematic in the case of the termination of a pregnancy.

Through the course of the following couple of weeks, I hope to investigate this further and explore the real intentions of Bill C-484 with you.