Abortions have only been legal in Canada for 36 years

By Ayla Maxwell

Abortion access and reproductive rights have become major points of contention in recent years. Since Roe v. Wade (the case for safe abortion access) was overturned by the United States Supreme Court in 2022, many U.S. states have dealt with the discussion of whether it should be up to the individual to make choices for their own body, or if the government should make the choice for them.

The discourse between pro-life vs. pro-choice activists in the U.S. has led to countries around the world revisiting the argument. Although many look at the issue glad they do not live in a place where rights are being stripped, what is the history of reproductive autonomy in Canada? And is Canada in danger of mirroring the United States? By looking at seven books written about this topic, a picture can be painted of how fragile our own systems really are and shed light on the atrocities committed by Canada’s government under the guise of being “morally correct.” 

White settlers (early seventeenth century)

As Jane Kirby writes in her book, Fired Up About Reproductive Rights, when white settlers began making families in Canada (sometime in the early seventeenth century), abortions were very much discouraged. Settlers wanted to reproduce as much as possible in order to better colonize the area. Kirby writes, “Encouraging white women to have babies was seen as one way to prevent ‘race suicide’” (43).

1892

The 1997 book The Bedroom and the State by Angus McLaren and Arlene Tigar McLaren highlights possibly one of the first bills passed about the issue. The 1892 criminal code stated that it was illegal to “offer to sell, advertise, publish an advertisement of or have for sale or disposal any medicine, drug or article intended or represented as a means of preventing conception or causing abortion” (9).

1914

An Act of Genocide: Colonialism and the Sterilization of Aboriginal Women by Karen Stote reveals many truths about Canada’s history of reproductive rights that are often overlooked. Indigenous communities had their own reproductive medicine practices. Contraception, pregnancy and lactation were all things Indigenous peoples had an understanding of before Western medicine stepped in.

In 1914, an amendment to the Indian Act was passed, stating that Indigenous peoples had to ‘submit’ to Western medical treatment and consequently, made it illegal to resist. Combined with the lack of government funding for Indigenous communities, many Indigenous people faced challenges conceiving and infant mortality rates were incredibly high. As Stote writes: “This effect was in keeping the purpose of the Indian Act – to reduce the numbers of those to whom the federal government has obligations either through bureaucratic means or in this case, through manipulation and outright starvation” (38-39).

1928

Another critical piece of history that is not discussed enough is well-detailed in Erika Dyck’s book Facing Eugenics: Reproduction, Sterilization, and the Politics of Choice. In 1928, Alberta passed the Sexual Sterilization Act and British Columbia followed in 1933. Dyck writes that the program: “from its beginning targeted individuals considered ‘feeble-minded’ or ‘mentally defective,’”(23). As the title of the act suggests, if one was labelled as such, they would be a candidate for sexual sterilization — operations like hysterectomies and vasectomies. Not only was this act incredibly ableist, but it targeted marginalized communities — especially Indigenous communities.

1937

An amendment was made to the Sexual Sterilization Act, detailed by Karen Stote in An Act of Genocide, that “in order to limit the likelihood of patients refusing sterilization, [the government] allowed the eugenics board to compel the sterilization of any patient it defined as mentally defective” (47). This meant that patients no longer had to give their consent to the operation, a right that was barely respected up until this point. Often community leaders would give consent on behalf of patients. Once again, this act targeted Indigenous peoples as the way to test mental “competence” was IQ testing. Stote points out that “IQ test presented many problems, particularly when applied to populations for which they are not subjected to tests based on specific Western European knowledge, those who are not part of this group tend to do poorly” (47).

1960

Jane Kirby’s Fired Up about Reproductive Rights cites that in 1960, “the birth control pill was available in Canada. However, it could only be legally prescribed to regulate menstruation, not for the purpose of birth control (47).

1968

Morgentaler V. Borowski by F.L. Morton details the story of a doctor, Henry Morgentaler, who in 1968 began performing illegal abortions on clients. He struggled with the dissonance between the law and his morals. He also began “performing vasectomies, providing IUDs and oral contraceptives” (33).

1969

In 1969, the Canadian government amended the criminal code of 1982, which “permitted abortions if a committee of doctors deemed a woman’s life or health was in danger” (47) writes Kirby, in Fired Up about Reproductive Rights. 

1972

Facing Eugenics by Erika Dyck notes that in 1972, the Sexual Sterilization Act was finally repealed. The government’s reasoning was “that it infringed upon human rights, particularly in cases where consent had not been obtained” (26). This was a victory in the fight for reproductive autonomy, but so much damage had been done in the 44 years that it was active. 

1973

Dr. Henry Morgentaler’s illegal abortions went on until June 1st, 1973 when the American FBI was tipped off about an “abortion ring”(35) in Canada. Morgantaler was arrested after a raid of his office when the police arrested him and raided his office. F.L. Morton points out in Morgentaler V. Borowski that Dr. Morgentaler was not only performing these abortions but also proving to the medical community that these procedures could be done incredibly safely. “Unlike the dilation and curettage (D&C) technique being used by others, Morgentaler’s suction abortion required no surgeon, no general anesthetic, no hospital, and could be performed in five to fifteen minutes” (34).

1988

After years of preparing and fighting for Morgentaler’s case, it finally came to an end. Not only did the Supreme Court of Canada acquit Morgentaler, but they ruled that “Canada’s abortion law was unconstitutional because it violated a woman’s right to “life, liberty, and security of the person’” (13). As Stan Persky writes in The Supreme Court of Canada Decision on Abortion, within the next week, Ontario announced coverage for all abortions in the province. Quebec followed shortly after. Although this was a huge win, it took years for some provinces, like Prince Edward Island, to finally adjust to the ruling.  

2012

The book Abortion: History, Politics and Reproductive Justice after Morgentaler by Shannon Stettner and Kristin Burnett includes that in 2012, under the Conservative government, many felt the need to revisit the ruling around abortion rights. MP Stephen Woodworth put forth a vote through the private members’ bill asking to revisit the Criminal Code, “the motion was defeated by a vote of 203 to 91” (71). 

Where are we now?

While Canada’s laws surrounding reproductive rights are safe for the time being, the overturning of Roe V. Wade in the United States and the impending second Donald Trump presidency calls for not only Americans to worry about their autonomy, but Canadians too.

The 203-91 vote of 2012 calls into question what would happen to Canada’s policy if the Conservative Party were to win the upcoming election. The rights citizens in Canada have are incredibly fragile, while abortion may be accessible and legal, Canadians do not have a widespread constitutional right. If one was able to successfully pass a vote through the private members’ bill to reopen the Criminal Code, it may be possible to limit citizens’ access to these services. 

Abortions have only been legal for 36 years — and Canadians must continue the fight for these rights.