 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|
For Immediate Release (Ottawa) – “While I am pleased that Mr. St. Denis seems to want to address the issue of violence against pregnant women, I am very disappointed he has fallen victim to the scare tactics of special interests groups who refuse to stand by pregnant women who want their unborn babies protected in law,” said Ken Epp, Member of Parliament for Edmonton – Sherwood Park. MP Brent St. Denis introduced a Private Members Bill this week which he said “plugs all the holes left by Bill C-484.” In his May 14 press release, Mr. St. Denis implied C-484 would “jeopardise a woman’s right to choose.” Yet C-484 explicitly excludes consensual abortion and acts or omissions by the pregnant woman. Mr. St. Denis’ “alternative” proposal, Bill C-543, would amend the Criminal Code to explicitly include pregnancy as an aggravating factor for sentencing purposes. “Why have increased penalties for attacks on pregnant women if the baby doesn’t matter?” Mr. Epp asked. “Either the unborn child matters so that attacks on pregnant women are more heinous, in which case Bill C-484 is a direct recognition of that reality; or the child doesn’t matter, in which case we don’t need any new law – the current provisions in the Criminal Code cover the violence to the woman. Mr. St. Denis’ acknowledgment that pregnancy is relevant suggests to me that deep down he must believe that the unborn child does matter. Yet he opposes C-484. So he seems conflicted about his own beliefs. Maybe that’s why he introduced a bill he knows has no chance of being debated in this Parliament.” Mr. Epp was referring to the fact that Mr. St. Denis already had his turn to debate a bill in early 2007 and the opportunity to debate a second bill won’t come up again in this Parliament. “Besides, my legal advisors and the Justice Department have assured me that pregnancy is already deemed an aggravating factor for sentencing purposes, as part of our case law,” Mr. Epp said. “And I have also been assured that C-484 will not change that. But if all we do is increase the penalty for attacking a pregnant woman without creating a separate offence for harming or killing her child, then we reinforce the offensive notion that the child’s fate is irrelevant. But the child’s death is very relevant to the mother (and other family members) who want her baby to live. As Mary Talbot, mother of Olivia Talbot and grandmother of Lane Jr. told the media, ‘It’s two people who died that day…I certainly put two people in a coffin.’” Mr. Epp concluded, “What right does anyone have to deny a pregnant woman the right to have the child she has chosen to bring to term protected in law? I can’t imagine any pregnant woman feeling that justice has been served if the person who brutally and intentionally killed the baby in her womb simply gets a stiffer sentence for assaulting her. What he did was wrong, not because she was pregnant, but because he killed her baby! The “alternative” Mr. St. Denis is proposing does not recognize her baby’s death. It does not address the horrible loss and grieving that mother feels. It’s not good enough for a caring society like Canada. Victims’ families and Canadians in general are crying out for justice! Let us not delay in doing the right thing and pass C-484 into law.” -30- Bill C-484 can be viewed here. |
| Back to C-484 Press Release page |
Site by: |