Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • COVID-19
    • Articles & podcasts
    • Blog posts
    • Collection
    • News
  • Content
    • Current issue
    • Past issues
    • Early releases
    • Collections
    • Sections
    • Blog
    • Infographics & illustrations
    • Podcasts
    • Classified ads
  • Authors
    • Overview for authors
    • Submission guidelines
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Forms
    • Editorial process
    • Editorial policies
    • Peer review process
    • Publication fees
    • Reprint requests
  • CMA Members
    • Overview for members
    • Earn CPD Credits
    • Print copies of CMAJ
    • Career Ad Discount
  • Subscribers
    • General information
    • View prices
  • Alerts
    • Email alerts
    • RSS
  • JAMC
    • À propos
    • Numéro en cours
    • Archives
    • Sections
    • Abonnement
    • Alertes
    • Trousse média 2021
  • CMAJ JOURNALS
    • CMAJ Open
    • CJS
    • JAMC
    • JPN

User menu

Search

  • Advanced search
CMAJ
  • CMAJ JOURNALS
    • CMAJ Open
    • CJS
    • JAMC
    • JPN
CMAJ

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • COVID-19
    • Articles & podcasts
    • Blog posts
    • Collection
    • News
  • Content
    • Current issue
    • Past issues
    • Early releases
    • Collections
    • Sections
    • Blog
    • Infographics & illustrations
    • Podcasts
    • Classified ads
  • Authors
    • Overview for authors
    • Submission guidelines
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Forms
    • Editorial process
    • Editorial policies
    • Peer review process
    • Publication fees
    • Reprint requests
  • CMA Members
    • Overview for members
    • Earn CPD Credits
    • Print copies of CMAJ
    • Career Ad Discount
  • Subscribers
    • General information
    • View prices
  • Alerts
    • Email alerts
    • RSS
  • JAMC
    • À propos
    • Numéro en cours
    • Archives
    • Sections
    • Abonnement
    • Alertes
    • Trousse média 2021
  • Visit CMAJ on Facebook
  • Follow CMAJ on Twitter
  • Follow CMAJ on Pinterest
  • Follow CMAJ on Youtube
  • Follow CMAJ on Instagram
News

Abortion access grim in English Canada

Lauren Vogel
CMAJ January 06, 2015 187 (1) 17; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.109-4947
Lauren Vogel
CMAJ
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Tables
  • Responses
  • Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Canadian women seeking to end unwanted pregnancies face wide gaps in access to abortion and have little choice in the technique used, a landmark study reveals.

Access to abortion depends largely on where you live, with wide disparities among provinces and between rural and urban locations, according to a new survey of abortion services in Canada. And with few options for drug-induced abortion — the preferred method for ending a pregnancy during the first trimester in the United States and many European peer nations — 96% of abortions in Canada are done surgically.

Researchers presented initial results of the 2012 survey, which was funded by the Society of Family Planning, at the recent Family Medicine Forum in Québec City. The venue was germane; the study shows that 46 of Canada’s 94 abortion facilities are located in Quebec. The province is also a leader in equitable access; half of its abortion facilities are in rural areas, and there’s at least one facility in every health region.

No other province comes close to providing the same level of access. British Columbia has 16 facilities located in hospitals, community health centres and doctors’ offices; half of these are in rural areas. There are 16 facilities in Ontario, 8 among Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba, 4 in Atlantic Canada and 4 in the territories. Of these facilities, only those in the territories and one in Atlantic Canada are located in rural areas. There is no facility in Prince Edward Island.

The results paint a starker picture than researchers expected, says co-investigator Dr. Edith Guilbert, a senior medical advisor at the National Institute of Public Health of Quebec. “We knew about PEI and we knew that access was difficult in New Brunswick, but now we have real data showing that it’s not just an Atlantic matter — the number of providers in the other English-speaking provinces is quite low.”

It’s also the first clear evidence that a laissez-faire approach to abortion provision doesn’t ensure equitable access. Since the 1970s, Quebec has dedicated funds to establish abortion clinics in underserved areas. And in the 1990s, BC legislated which hospitals must offer abortion services to ensure rural and remote access. Both provinces support provider networks, and in BC there’s a hotline women can call to connect with the nearest facility in the network.

Figure1

Outside Quebec, it can be a long road from confirming an unwanted pregnancy to accessing the means to end it.

Image courtesy of Pojoslaw/iStock/Thinkstock

“These are the only jurisdictions where the proportion of rural facilities is equal to or greater than the proportion of women living in these areas,” says co-investigator Dr. Wendy Norman, who holds the Canadian Institutes of Health Research/Public Health Agency of Canada chair in applied public health research.

This means women wait longer and travel farther, which puts them at higher risk of having a second trimester abortion and its associated complications. And for those without the resources or time to navigate the system, it may mean carrying an unwanted pregnancy to term.

“Canada has never counted the costs being incurred … when abortion services aren’t accessible,” says Norman.

Guilbert says that increasing access to medical abortion — that is, abortion induced by oral medication — could close some of the gaps in rural access because a local family doctor could administer the drug.

Yet barely 4% of abortions in Canada are done this way, compared with more than half in some peer nations, such as France. This is largely because the best abortion drugs are not available in Canada — “we are relying on medications that are not optimal,” says Guilbert.

Health Canada has been considering whether to approve mifepristone (known as RU-486) since December 2012. According to a CMAJ commentary (2013;186:13–14), the drug is considered the gold standard for inducing safe and early nonsurgical abortion. But Canadian physicians must rely on less effective drugs ordinarily used to treat ectopic pregnancy, or in some cases, cancer.

“These are slow to act, and when you explain to women it’s going to take two or three weeks or more before the abortion is complete, they very quickly opt for a surgical abortion,” says Guilbert.

Norman argues that Canada is “not providing top-notch access for women to the full range of reproductive services across Canada.”

PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Canadian Medical Association Journal: 187 (1)
CMAJ
Vol. 187, Issue 1
6 Jan 2015
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author

Article tools

Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
To sign up for email alerts or to access your current email alerts, enter your email address below:
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on CMAJ.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Abortion access grim in English Canada
(Your Name) has sent you a message from CMAJ
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the CMAJ web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Abortion access grim in English Canada
Lauren Vogel
CMAJ Jan 2015, 187 (1) 17; DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.109-4947

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
‍ Request Permissions
Share
Abortion access grim in English Canada
Lauren Vogel
CMAJ Jan 2015, 187 (1) 17; DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.109-4947
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
  • Figures & Tables
  • Responses
  • Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • Identifying and treating group A streptococcal pharyngitis in children
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Canada’s long road to a vaccine injury compensation program
  • Health advocates want help handling online harassment
  • Reconciliation in health care must go beyond cultural sensitivity
Show more News

Similar Articles

Content

  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • Collections
  • Sections
  • Blog
  • Podcasts
  • Alerts
  • RSS
  • Early releases

Information for

  • Advertisers
  • Authors
  • Reviewers
  • CMA Members
  • Media
  • Reprint requests
  • Subscribers

About

  • General Information
  • Journal staff
  • Editorial Board
  • Governance Council
  • Journal Oversight
  • Careers
  • Contact
  • Copyright and Permissions

Copyright 2021, Joule Inc. or its licensors. All rights reserved. ISSN 1488-2329 (e) 0820-3946 (p)

All editorial matter in CMAJ represents the opinions of the authors and not necessarily those of the Canadian Medical Association or its subsidiaries.

To receive any of the resources on this site in an accessible format, please contact us at cmajgroup@cmaj.ca.

Powered by HighWire