Abortion considered an illness under EI
From the Canadian Taxpayers Federation:
The assertion about 'abortion being a private matter between a woman and her doctor' has been made a lot this week, mostly by proponents of the Supreme Court ruling that struck down Canada’s abortion law 20 years ago. It’s a clever jingle, but not entirely true. At least not as far as taxpayers are concerned...For those seeking a clear definition, Termination of pregnancy as defined under the rules outlined by Service Canada is as follows:
While few Canadians are clamouring for legislative restrictions on abortion, it is doubtful those same voters would support government promoting it. Hence, the pro-abortion lobby employs language that implies the state has little to do with it. They say it’s about the freedom to choose, an individual’s choice, and the state has no business interfering in a private decision. It’s a position that satisfies small-government libertarians as well as those claiming to be both fiscally conservative and socially liberal. Yet, government is more involved in promoting abortion than Canadians realize.
We’re familiar with provincial funding of abortion (with the exception of New Brunswick). Of course, it’s not terribly expensive – it is estimated $50-million a year is spent on the medical procedure from a $100-billion public health budget. Ultimately, it is for provincial legislatures to decide whether or not to fund it under Medicare.
But what might Canadians say about the federal government offering unemployment benefits to women who have an abortion? It is worth asking because Ottawa’s employment insurance (EI) program does just that.
According to EI guidelines, when a pregnancy is terminated within the first 19 weeks it is considered an illness and benefits can be collected. Ottawa does not distinguish between a miscarriage and an abortion. If an abortion occurs in the 20th week or later benefits are paid out under the EI maternity program despite there being no mother or child. According to the federal government, the 'birth mother' need only sign 'a statement declaring the expected due or actual date of birth.' Illness and maternity benefits are paid for up to three and a half months...
Ottawa should move to undo its spending policies that either encourage or reward having an abortion. It should certainly not pay out EI illness or maternity benefits when there is no child.
When a pregnancy terminates within the first 19 weeks of pregnancy, it is considered an illness under EI. If that is the case, sickness benefits may be paid as long as the qualifying conditions for sickness benefits are met.It's bad enough when the Government of Canada uses statist coercion as a means to shape the daily lives of all Canadians. But let me tell you, they have sunk to an all-time [unethical] low if they believe the gift of life is something so insignificant that a woman can give it up after a few weeks for a couple of bucks. Shame.
On the other hand, if the pregnancy terminates in the 20th week or later, the claim for benefits can be considered for maternity benefits if the qualifying conditions for maternity benefits are met.
*entire post gerrymandered from Sobering Thoughts. Hope Paul will forgive me.
4 Comments:
As I've written many, many, many times (and will continue to do so), this is a far more complicated issue than MSM (and sadly most politicians) would lead us to believe. It's a taboo subject which needs to come out of the closet with some honest dialogue and action from politicians. 105,000 abortions in Canada a year? 31 out of every 100 live births? No legal restrictions at all from stopping someone from aborting the baby (or fetus that looks suspiciously like a baby if you prefer) one second before he/she is born? And Morgentaler who along with his supporters wants his private clinics given preferential treatment and be funded by taxpayers. Clearly some discussion is needed.
No doubt spinks. Abortion is just one of a few social issues that require a significant amount of discussion. Not to mention, a host of economic and democratic issues.
That's a worst comment then the Beer and Popcorn from the liberals. Because you are directly saying that women abort their baby to get EI benefit.
Unless you prove that some women considered this factor has one of the reason why they choose to have an abortion, you're talking out of your $%/".
I made a lot of comment on spinks about we need to talk about various solution and put the money to help support women who will support their children alone.
But your comment is so wrong. Because if you look at EI regulation you could say to your employer you're pregnant get a maternity leave, apply for EI, call the EI office saying you had the baby and collect you're EI check for a year without ever showing proof of anything.
But I think the governement does the right thing and does not think every women are crooks and liars.
But your comment is so wrong. Because if you look at EI regulation you could say to your employer you're pregnant get a maternity leave, apply for EI, call the EI office saying you had the baby and collect you're EI check for a year without ever showing proof of anything.
Yes, but that's the same problem we have with EI (ppl making bogus claims) in parts of New Brunswick. It's fraud. No if, and or buts.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home