Merry Christmas!!!
Saturday, December 25, 2010
Wednesday, December 22, 2010
SCC to make ruling on Human Reproduction Act
OTTAWA—The Supreme Court of Canada hands down a landmark ruling on Quebec’s challenge of the federal power to control human reproductive technologies on Wednesday morning.
It’s the oldest outstanding case on the top court’s docket, on a question of far-reaching scope and complexity.
But it all comes down to this — what level of government gets to say what would-be parents, sperm or egg donors can do in the quest to reproduce?
It’s a question bedevilling many Canadians who sometimes go to great lengths to have children.
The Star reported Tuesday on a Canadian couple now stranded in India with twins — children born of a surrogate mother and an unknown donor’s egg but later determined not to be the genetic offspring of the father as thought.
Under Canadian law it is illegal to pay for sperm donors, egg donors or surrogates.
The family is now in a legal immigration limbo.
Quebec does not challenge Ottawa’s attempt to stop the commercialization of assisted human reproductive technologies.
Nor does Quebec oppose the federal ban on cloning, or reproductive technologies that would produce human/non-human hybrids.
But the province says Ottawa went too far when it assumed the power to regulate a whole other range of activities that Quebec says fall under medical services. Quebec says such services are between a doctor and a patient and come under its jurisdiction, not under criminal law as the federal government contends.
Quebec objects to Ottawa’s regulating the area of consent, as well as its intent to license fertility clinics, to control the import, export or transplant of eggs, sperm or embryos, to control the reimbursement of donors for expenses, to impose privacy controls or carry out inspections, searches and seizures of clinical premises.
In reality, while the law was enacted in 2004, Health Canada has only enacted one regulation — requiring the written consent of donors for the use of eggs, sperm or embryos.
The rest of the field is a grey zone, with much riding on Wednesday’s ruling.
If the court upholds Quebec’s arguments, it would have broad implications for provinces to proceed to regulate many assisted reproductive activities as they see fit, and could lead to a patchwork of practices across Canada.
However, that’s the case with many medical procedures which are regulated by provinces now.
As it stands, the federal law — the Assisted Human Reproduction Act — carries heavy penalties.
Breaches are criminal offences, and carry maximum penalties of up to $250,000 in fines or five years in jail for certain violations of “controlled activities.” For breaches of the outright bans on other practices, the penalties can range up to $500,000 fines or up to 10 years in jail.
Quebec’s challenge was backed by the governments of New Brunswick, Saskatchewan and Alberta which intervened when the appeal was heard in April 2009.
The Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops and the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada intervened in support of the federal government’s side.
On June 19, 2008, the Quebec Court of Appeal agreed with the province, and ruled the provisions went beyond the federal criminal law-making power to protect public health, morality and security of persons who are the offspring of assisted fertility treatments.
The appeal court concluded Ottawa wasn’t trying to prevent wrongdoing, but rather trying to control a medical activity to promote uniform Canadian national standards.
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/910615--top-court-to-rule-on-ottawa-s-human-reproduction-law
It’s the oldest outstanding case on the top court’s docket, on a question of far-reaching scope and complexity.
But it all comes down to this — what level of government gets to say what would-be parents, sperm or egg donors can do in the quest to reproduce?
It’s a question bedevilling many Canadians who sometimes go to great lengths to have children.
The Star reported Tuesday on a Canadian couple now stranded in India with twins — children born of a surrogate mother and an unknown donor’s egg but later determined not to be the genetic offspring of the father as thought.
Under Canadian law it is illegal to pay for sperm donors, egg donors or surrogates.
The family is now in a legal immigration limbo.
Quebec does not challenge Ottawa’s attempt to stop the commercialization of assisted human reproductive technologies.
Nor does Quebec oppose the federal ban on cloning, or reproductive technologies that would produce human/non-human hybrids.
But the province says Ottawa went too far when it assumed the power to regulate a whole other range of activities that Quebec says fall under medical services. Quebec says such services are between a doctor and a patient and come under its jurisdiction, not under criminal law as the federal government contends.
Quebec objects to Ottawa’s regulating the area of consent, as well as its intent to license fertility clinics, to control the import, export or transplant of eggs, sperm or embryos, to control the reimbursement of donors for expenses, to impose privacy controls or carry out inspections, searches and seizures of clinical premises.
In reality, while the law was enacted in 2004, Health Canada has only enacted one regulation — requiring the written consent of donors for the use of eggs, sperm or embryos.
The rest of the field is a grey zone, with much riding on Wednesday’s ruling.
If the court upholds Quebec’s arguments, it would have broad implications for provinces to proceed to regulate many assisted reproductive activities as they see fit, and could lead to a patchwork of practices across Canada.
However, that’s the case with many medical procedures which are regulated by provinces now.
As it stands, the federal law — the Assisted Human Reproduction Act — carries heavy penalties.
Breaches are criminal offences, and carry maximum penalties of up to $250,000 in fines or five years in jail for certain violations of “controlled activities.” For breaches of the outright bans on other practices, the penalties can range up to $500,000 fines or up to 10 years in jail.
Quebec’s challenge was backed by the governments of New Brunswick, Saskatchewan and Alberta which intervened when the appeal was heard in April 2009.
The Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops and the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada intervened in support of the federal government’s side.
On June 19, 2008, the Quebec Court of Appeal agreed with the province, and ruled the provisions went beyond the federal criminal law-making power to protect public health, morality and security of persons who are the offspring of assisted fertility treatments.
The appeal court concluded Ottawa wasn’t trying to prevent wrongdoing, but rather trying to control a medical activity to promote uniform Canadian national standards.
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/910615--top-court-to-rule-on-ottawa-s-human-reproduction-law
Friday, December 17, 2010
Surro Dilemma
Having a really tough time with choosing a surrogate. We met and immediately fell in love with a lovely woman who was pregnant with her first surro baby. Both DH and I felt as though we had hit the jackpot. She has since given birth to a healthy baby girl BUT it was via c-section. Our RE (we've switched to other doctor in same practice...later post) immediately vetoed that choice and strongly suggested our second surro option was a better decision.
As i have mentioned in earlier posts, I have some reservations about this person. DH is ready to move along even though he shares my concerns..this week we have barely spoken to each other because he thinks I am dragging my feet and I feel pressured and unfortunately the way I handle is by working late and leaving early :(
I don't want to be without a surro in the New Year but I also want to feel good about our decision.
HELP!! What would you do?
As i have mentioned in earlier posts, I have some reservations about this person. DH is ready to move along even though he shares my concerns..this week we have barely spoken to each other because he thinks I am dragging my feet and I feel pressured and unfortunately the way I handle is by working late and leaving early :(
I don't want to be without a surro in the New Year but I also want to feel good about our decision.
HELP!! What would you do?
Tuesday, December 14, 2010
I AM MAD!!
I am mad!!
Mad at all the people who are sending pregnancy announcements
Mad at DH
Mad at all those people who didn't support our pregnancy (ended in pre-term labour) 10 years ago because in their minds it wasn't the right time
Mad at my mother who never has the time to be supportive but all the time in the world to share the latest family gossip
Mad at my bosses for working me like an indentured servant
Mad at the doctors quick to prescribe more drugs before doing a holistic evaluation of my entire body
Mad at the bureaucracy that is requiring me to take costly accreditation exams to prove my competency
Mad at the university providing review sessions for those exams and providing a "constitutional" lecturer who claims that PM Harper is head of State....WHAT!!!!!! Have you even read the damn constitution?
Mad at all the people who say ...RELAX it will happen
Mad at my 22 yr old cousin who is now pregnant!!
I am mad that in the New Year I will be paying another woman to carry my child
Yes I am very mad but underneath all that madness is an incredible sadness that is overwhelming, a sadness that brings me to my knees.
Mad at all the people who are sending pregnancy announcements
Mad at DH
Mad at all those people who didn't support our pregnancy (ended in pre-term labour) 10 years ago because in their minds it wasn't the right time
Mad at my mother who never has the time to be supportive but all the time in the world to share the latest family gossip
Mad at my bosses for working me like an indentured servant
Mad at the doctors quick to prescribe more drugs before doing a holistic evaluation of my entire body
Mad at the bureaucracy that is requiring me to take costly accreditation exams to prove my competency
Mad at the university providing review sessions for those exams and providing a "constitutional" lecturer who claims that PM Harper is head of State....WHAT!!!!!! Have you even read the damn constitution?
Mad at all the people who say ...RELAX it will happen
Mad at my 22 yr old cousin who is now pregnant!!
I am mad that in the New Year I will be paying another woman to carry my child
Yes I am very mad but underneath all that madness is an incredible sadness that is overwhelming, a sadness that brings me to my knees.
Monday, December 6, 2010
Questions but no Answers
Just found out in the last few day that the lovely woman who we were hoping would be our surro next year had a C-section last month which means that our schedules are now probably not in synch. We have a meeting with RE this week and will find out when will be the safest time for her to carry another pregnancy.
We do have an alternate surro but although she seems friendly and cooperative, there were a few things that acted as a red flag for me.
1. She mentioned that her children's uncle (BTW - she has seven and no multiples, so fertility is definitely not an issue for her :)) had been shot in the last few weeks and had died. In fact DH remembered reading / hearing about it. Of course this revelation made me super nervous.
2. She complimented my husband on his JEANS..huh? I thought this was weird but maybe she was just being friendly.
3. She insists that IPs transfer no less than 3 embryos...even though I understand her argument which is, that the probability of implantation is higher with more embryos, I believe it is the IPs right to make the final determination regarding the numbers.
Praying that our preferred surro will recover nicely and assist in our journey to be parents. Meeting with the lawyer in Jan. She comes highly recommended and so we are very keen to work with her.
On a happier note, this weekend DH and I will host our annual Holiday Party!! Pics next week.
We do have an alternate surro but although she seems friendly and cooperative, there were a few things that acted as a red flag for me.
1. She mentioned that her children's uncle (BTW - she has seven and no multiples, so fertility is definitely not an issue for her :)) had been shot in the last few weeks and had died. In fact DH remembered reading / hearing about it. Of course this revelation made me super nervous.
2. She complimented my husband on his JEANS..huh? I thought this was weird but maybe she was just being friendly.
3. She insists that IPs transfer no less than 3 embryos...even though I understand her argument which is, that the probability of implantation is higher with more embryos, I believe it is the IPs right to make the final determination regarding the numbers.
Praying that our preferred surro will recover nicely and assist in our journey to be parents. Meeting with the lawyer in Jan. She comes highly recommended and so we are very keen to work with her.
On a happier note, this weekend DH and I will host our annual Holiday Party!! Pics next week.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)