Abortion pill no ‘magic bullet’
Approval does not mean fight for access rights is over, professor says
The newly approved abortion pill should not be seen as a solution to the problem many Canadian women have accessing abortion, says a leading Ottawa researcher.
“We have to make sure we don’t treat the abortion pill as the magic bullet, because access (to abortion) is complex,” said Christabelle Sethna, an associate professor with the Institute of Women’s Studies and the faculty of social sciences and University of Ottawa. “We have to be wary of thinking it is the solution to problems that are deep-rooted.”
The federal government approved the abortion pill RU-486 with little fanfare last month on the eve of the federal election. Canada had been criticized for taking so long to approve the drug, which has been used in France since 1988 and in the United States since 2000.
Sethna and co-author Marion Doull of the University of British Columbia published research in 2013 that underscored how difficult it is for many Canadian women to access an abortion, despite the fact that there are no legal restrictions and it is considered a “medically necessary” service.
It found that there has been a steady drop in hospitals providing abortions — currently, about 16 per cent do. And free-standing abortion clinics are based mainly in urban centres. Ottawa and Toronto are the only cities in Ontario with free-standing clinics.
Women from Prince Edward Island must travel off the island to receive an abortion, and they are not the only Canadian women who travel for abortion services, the authors found in research funded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.
Many women in rural, Northern and coastal parts of the country cross provincial boundaries to get an abortion, often paying their own costs, they say. They also found that First Nations and Metis women who live in rural and remote communities face additional barriers to abortion, including the general demands of travel as well as a formal approval system for off-reserve travel for medical services.
Some have hailed the abortion pill as a solution to access problems, but Sethna said that is unlikely.
“I am hoping this abortion pill will help a lot of women. I don’t think it is going to solve the larger problem of access.”
Among other things, she said, women might still have to travel to see a doctor and might have difficulty finding one nearby who is comfortable administering the drug, which causes a miscarriage. Her research also found that some women chose not to go to a nearby hospital to access an abortion for privacy reasons.
“For some people it is going to be the solution, but not all.”
Canadian women are obtaining fewer abortions than in previous years with the greatest decline among women under 20, according to 2008 data from Statistics Canada. The numbers reflect decreased sexual activity among young people and increased contraceptive use, Sethna and Doull wrote, but could also reflect access to the procedure.
Availability of RU-486, expected by 2016, will give Canadian women more choice, said Sethna.
“I am not saying I am unhappy with this. I think it is great because it enlarges the range of options so women can make a more informed choice.”