Sibling abortions, medical abortions, abortions > 14 weeks

I asked for, and received, abortion data for four Ontario regions: Hamilton, Ottawa, Peel and Toronto, for three years: 2019, 2020 and 2021. The data is for both hospitals and non-hospital settings. It is broken down by year within each city, and by abortion code.

While every abortion is a tragic reality, I am always struck by the particular evil of fetal reduction abortions (code P054). How does anyone even decide to do this? You have two children growing inside your womb, and you make the decision to kill one of them. How do you decide which child to kill? When the remaining alive child grows up, do you tell her that you killed her sister? Fetal reduction abortions:

• There were 36 of these sibling abortions in Ottawa during these three years.
• There were 401 of these sibling abortions in Toronto during these three years.

Then there are the > 14 weeks gestation abortions (code S785):

• Hamilton performed 462 of these abortions during these three years.
• Ottawa performed 598 of these abortions during these three years.
• Peel performed 217 of these abortions during these three years.
• Toronto performed 3,122 of these abortions during these three years.

Medical abortions seem to be increasing every year (Code A920). I guess this should not be a surprise:

• Hamilton performed 2,497, 2,985, and 3,200 for each year = 8,682
• Ottawa performed 1,667, 1,745, and 1,781 for each year = 5,193
• Peel performed 621, 2,265, 3,644 for each year = 6,530
• Toronto performed 8,035, 7,635 and 7,660 for each year - 23,330

All Ontario abortion codes:

S752 - induced - by any surgical technique up to and including 14 weeks gestation 

S785 - induced - by any surgical technique after 14 weeks of gestation

A920A - MEDICAL MANAGEMENT OF EARLY PREGNANCY - INITIAL VISIT (medical abortions)

P001A - MEDICAL MGMT FETAL DEMISE BETWEEN 14-20 WKS GESTATION

P054A - selective fetal reduction of one or more fetuses by intracardiac potassium chloride injection

S770A - CORPUS UTERI - HYSTEROTOMY.

S783A - CORPUS UTERI - HYSTEROTOMY WITH TUBAL INTERRUPTION.

Ontario abortion numbers 2020/2021

Readable formats below.

2020/2021 Ontario abortion stats

2019/2020 Ontario abortion stats (for comparison purposes)

CIHI missing 18,278 Ontario abortions in 2019 statistics

CIHI has reported abortion numbers for 2019

Back in December I posted a comparison chart of CIHI's numbers compared to FOI's I did for each province.

CIHI reported 27,911 for Ontario for 2019. The Ontario Ministry of Health and Long Term Care (MOHLTC) reported 46,189. that means that CIHI is not reporting a whopping 18,278 Ontario abortions.

CIHI believes they are accounting for the difference. Unfortunately they are not. From CIHI's notes:

"The methodology to estimate induced abortion volumes for Ontario is consistent with the enhanced methodology that was introduced in the 2015 report (emphasis added). Total volumes were derived by using the total abortion volumes reported to the National Physician Database (NPDB) at CIHI and adding both hospital-based abortions for non-Ontario residents and hospital-based medical-method-only abortions for Ontario residents (as reported to the Discharge Abstract Database and the National Ambulatory Care Reporting System). For Ontario, volumes reported in the column Number of induced abortions reported by clinics include services from non-hospital settings. Volumes for non-hospital settings (clinics/surgical facilities/physician offices) were estimated using the total abortion volumes as described above and subtracting hospital-based abortions. This methodology results in induced abortions occurring in physician offices and in clinics being included in non-hospital settings volumes. This estimation approach for non-hospital volumes was required because information on the location where the service is rendered (e.g., clinic, hospital, physician’s office) may not be included in the NPDB data." 

CIHI does not report medical abortions. They only report these abortions: S752 - induced - by any surgical technique up to and including 14 weeks gestation, S785 - induced - by any surgical technique after 14 weeks of gestation. 

How many of these 18,278 missing abortions are medical abortions? We do not know.

MOHLTC does report medical abortions. As well as all these types:

A920A - MEDICAL MANAGEMENT OF EARLY PREGNANCY - INITIAL VISIT (medical abortions)
P001A MEDICAL MGMT FETAL DEMISE BETWEEN 14-20 WKS GESTATION
P054A FETAL MANAGEMENT-SGL/MULT-INTRACARDIAC KCL INJECTION
S752A FEM.GENITAL SYST.-INDUCED-CURRETINTRA-AMNIOTIC INJ.
S770A CORPUS UTERI - HYSTEROTOMY.
S783A CORPUS UTERI - HYSTEROTOMY WITH TUBAL INTERRUPTION.
S785A FEM.GENITAL SYST.-INDUCED-INTRA-AMNIOTIC INJ. (INCOMP.)

Ontario abortion rates are going up

Ontario abortion rates as reported by the Ontario Ministry of Long-Term Care are going up. Yet CIHI shows a decrease in Ontario abortion rates. So I'm not sure why CIHI keeps reporting Ontario numbers. In any event, since the MOHLTC's numbers are based on doctor's billing records, they intuitively should be more accurate.

You can see from the chart that overall, MOHLTC's numbers went down for three years in a row (2014/2015 to 2017/2017), but then for the next three years (2017/2018 to 2019/2020), they went up.

This disturbing trend upwards is most likely due to the abortion pill which became legal in 2017. This is really bad news for Canadians, especially those still in the womb.

Previous recent posts on abortion statistics:

Ontario out of province abortions for 2017

Canadian abortion statistics: who does, and who does not, report medical abortions

Ontario abortion numbers 2017/2018 

UPDATE The facts about abortions statistics in Canada

2016 abortion statistics - CIHI is still under reporting abortions

CIHI has released their 2016 abortion statistics. They are down slightly from 2015. 

For Ontario, CIHI reported 38,383 abortions. This number is 5,726 less than what the Ontario the Ministry of Health and Long Term Care reported for 2016/2017: 44,109.

So CIHI's numbers continue to be under reported.

UPDATE: 2014-2015 abortion statistics

I've had a few people ask me to point to exactly where the Ontario Government reveals the number of abortions performed in Ontario in 2014-2015.

This information is on page 26, Appendix A: of the Ontario government's Factum. The link for the government's factum (Ministry of the Attorney General) is here:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_QDsYLWnwO6QU9HQ01ISDdLSWc/view

Appendix A:  DATA RE PROVISION OF ABORTION SERVICES

NUMBER OF ABORTION SERVICES (15) BILLED IN ONTARIO IN FISCAL YEAR 2014-2015: 45,471

(15) Total number of services billed under OHIP Billing codes: A920A, P001A, S752A AND S785A

I have since then asked the Minister Eric Hoskins to provide me with a further breakdown of these abortions by hospital, clinic, and physcians's offices.

Getting abortion information outside of FIPPA

Yesterday in court, the Ontario government's lawyer stated that in the future the the Ministry of Health and Long Term care (MOHLT) "will release annual statistical abortion data outside of FIPPA". This was stated by the lawyer yesterday, as well as in the government's factum.

And as I stated yesterday they did release 2014/2015 abortion statistics: 45,471.

So I just sent the letter below to the Minister of Health Eric Hoskins and cc'd Kathleen Wynne, asking for the breakdown of that data. Since there is no identifiable hospital information, patient information, provider information in my request, my request should be granted. 

I will keep you posted.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

February 2, 2017

Dr. Eric Hoskins

Minister of Health and Long Term Care

Legislative Assembly of Ontario

111 Wellesley St W, Toronto

ON M7A 1A2, Canada

Dear Dr. Hoskins,

As I'm sure you are aware, yesterday we sat in a court room in Ottawa trying to find out why your government decided to hide abortion information in 2012.

This is when your government inserted clause section 65.(5.7) “This Act does not apply to records relating to the provision of abortion services.” into the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.

One of the interesting things we learned yesterday from the government's lawyer, is that although abortion related information is excluded from FIPPA, we only need to contact the government and they will provide us with abortion information.

So I am making a request to you (outside FIPPA), to provide me with the breakdown of the 2014/2015 abortion number (45,471). I would like to receive all the OHIP billing codes that make up this total number.

I assume that the billing codes would be similar to the codes I received in my 2010 FOIs on abortion. they are as follows:

P054 - selective fetal reduction of one or more fetuses by intracardiac potassium chloride injection

S752 - induced - by any surgical technique up to and including 14 weeks gestation

S785 - induced - by any surgical technique after 14 weeks of Gestation

S770 - hysterotomy (may be claimed for purposes other than Therapeutic abortion)

S783 - hysterotomy with tubal interruption (may be claimed for purposes other than Therapeutic abortion)

A920 - medical management of termination of pregnancy

This code is also a possible code:

P001A - Medical management of non-viable fetus or intra-uterine fetal demise between 14 and 20 weeks gestation

There may be additional codes that make up the total number, in which case I would like to see those codes and associated totals as well.

I would also like to receive a breakdown like I did in 2010 where the abortions are further subdivided between hospital abortions, clinic abortions, and physician's Offices abortions. See here for an example of the data I received before http://run-with-life.blogspot.ca/2012/03/more-abortion-statistics-for-ontario.html

I look forward to hearing back from you at your earliest convenience,

Sincerely,

Patricia Maloney

Ontario: 18,330 abortions done in doctors offices in 2010

Wendy Norman grossly underestimates the number of abortions done in Ontario each year. She says it's about 6,000. In 2010 there were actually over three times that many abortions done in Ontario in physician's offices.

That's a whopping 18,330 abortions performed in doctor's offices in that one year alone.

But don't expect to find out how many abortions are being done in doctor's offices in Ontario this year. Because you won't. Not since the Ontario government, under Kathleen Wynne's pro-abortion agenda, continues to make sure that all abortions performed in Ontario are of the top secret variety.

Below see my chart that I published in 2011. These numbers are based on doctor's OHIP billings. In fact, of all those abortions done in doctor's offices, not one of them was reported by CIHI (CIHI doesn't report on abortions done in private physician's offices).

2010 is the only year we will ever see those numbers.

Paying for abortions - why?

Why must Ontarians pay for their own eye exam, when all of us have to pay for someone else's abortion? Can someone please explain this to me?

Freedom of Information case moves forward

Today we issued our Factum and Book of Authorities with the ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE DIVISIONAL COURT.

This is for my Judicial Review of the Ontario government's decision to exclude all abortion services from access requests made under the Freedom of Information and Privacy Act.

More information here.

Contact information here.

Kathleen Wynne is the only one with a last name

I called Kathleen's office again. (I called earlier this week and spoke with Ian and Vera.)

This time I spoke with Cheryl and Carlitta.

Nobody there has last names it seems, and they won't give them to you if you ask. What are they afraid of?

In any event, I got lectured on how, even though Kathleen's Open and Transparent Government initiative is her initiative, well each piece of data (like abortion data) belongs to a particular Ministry and not the Premier.

She referred me to the Minister's office, where of course, I have been in touch with many times already and still waiting for answers.

I told Carlitta that although I understand what she's trying to say, I still maintain it is the Premier's responsibility to answer my very simple question, since is is Kathleen's initiative. Carlitta disagreed.

You see, this is what open, transparent and accountable government actually looks like in Ontario: not open, transparent and accountable.

That's what the gas plants and subsequent email deletion campaign looks like too. The big cheese simply doesn't take any responsibility and gets off the hook, downloading the fallout to all the poor schmucks underneath them.

Kathleen, and Dalton before her, seem to be experts at not being accountable. That's why they have last names.

The abortion exclusion clause - no transparency here

Nobody asked for the abortion exclusion clause to be inserted into Bill 122 (the Broader Sector Accountability Act and the Freedom of Information and Privacy Act (FIPPA).

Not a single person. Not a single organization. Nobody.

So how did the exclusion clause end up in the Bill?

There were no hospitals advising for the exclusion clause. There were no physicians advising for the exclusion clause. There was no public at large advising for the exclusion clause.

There was one person though, who advised the government against putting in the exclusion clause.

Through a Freedom of Information request, I learned that Cybele Sack, a patient care advocate, advised the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care to not include the abortion exclusion clause. Ms. Sack made her submission on November 23, 2010:

"Current provisions in Bill 122 which should be reconsidered given the patient safety context:- Not applying it to boards of health, health professionals' personal practice, abortion services..."

If doctors and physicians had advised the government to put the clause in (as my MPP Madeleine Meilleur indicated to me), I would have seen those recommendation in the FOI. 

No other stakeholder made any reference to the clause. Their presentations are here and here. The word "abortion" doesn't appear anywhere in these consultations.

In any event, the clause was already in the Bill before public consultations took place. If someone had asked the government to put the clause in, I would see that in what I received. I didn't. 

Did the Minister put the clause in herself for ideological reasons?

I've given Minister Deb Matthews ample opportunity to explain the source of the clause. But she can't, or won't, or doesn't want to.

The only logical explanation is that--contrary to my MPP's statements that the Ministry doesn't put in clauses for their own sake, but rather that it is only done after public consultations--the Ministry or Minister put this clause into the Bill.

Here is the narrative of what Ms. Meilleur told me when I met her in her office:

I asked her why the exclusion clause was included in the Bill. She said that it came into affect:

"to assist hospitals, at the request of the hospitals, to maintain the quality and the privacy of the information. So it was not specific to abortion, it was among other things...I don't think you'd like your private information to be disclosed to the public." 

When I pressed her further she said:

"at the request of the hospital, at the request of the physician, this was supported...the objective of this government and past governments have put in place the Freedom of Information Act, so it was to protect certain information, and this was added because of concerns the physicians had and the concern the hospitals had, so that's why it's in place." 

I then asked her to confirm that the hospitals and physicians has asked to have this exclusion clause. Her response was: 

"When we do amendments it's not because the government that decides there is an amendment, it's at the request of others and it's discussed and its put forward after wide consultations with those concerned". 

As I continued to press her on this, she responded: 

"You know what, it's not my Ministry so I don't know all the details, so I think that these questions should be put to the Ministry of Health to see how it came about. You will get the information." 

She said it was: 

"the hospitals, the physicians and the public at large...the Minister can give you the specifics...the Minister has all the answers...your questions are very detailed...send her a letter and cc me so when she replies I will receive your response...the Ministry has all the expertise and all the answers..."

It may be the case that the Minister has all the answers. But she won't share them with me. After sending her many emails and calling her office many times, I still don't have any of the answers, never mind "all the answers". 

The only feasible answer is that the Minister herself is responsible for the clause. A clause that does away with our access to information rights.

If I'm wrong, she should let me know.

My response to the Premier - who never responded to me

January 10, 2014

Dear Ms. Wynne,

As noted in my email below to Ms. Matthews, I sent you a question on October 20, 2013, regarding your Open and Transparent Government initiative. Perhaps you missed it in my first letter? If so, would you be so kind as to answer it for me now?

Here it is again:

Can you please tell me if your plans for open and transparent government will include the lifting of the secret curtain on abortion services in Ontario?

Thank you so much.

Sincerely,
Patricia Maloney

My response to Deb Matthews

January 10, 2014

Dear Ms. Matthews,

Thank you for your December 19 response to my October 15 and 16 letters in which I asked you six questions regarding the abortion exclusion clause your government made to the Ontario Freedom of Information and Privacy Act (FIPPA).

You say that the Premier Kathleen Wynne referred my email to her, to you--regarding her Open and Transparent Government Initiative. I had asked Ms. Wynne if she would lift the secrecy of the availability of abortion statistics under this initiative. However, I could not find your answer to this question in your letter. I will go back to Ms. Wynne and ask her the question again.

In your letter you state that:

"Regarding the Canadian Institute for Health Information’s (CIHI) published abortion statistics, I understand that CIHI specifically indicates that when reporting abortion figures, counts of abortions by province are an underestimate count and that it is currently the best way to produce pan-Canadian comparable data. For information on CIHI’s compilation of statistical data you may wish to contact CIHI directly."

I have contacted CIHI on numerous occasions already about this. Because of the way CIHI produces those statistics (i.e. they base their statistics on hospital discharge records and not medical billing records), they were unable to produce more accurate statistics. Therefore contacting CIHI again (as you suggest), will still not yield accurate statistics. So again I ask you, can you please provide me with a way to obtain accurate abortion statistics?

You say that "These amendments were debated and passed in the Legislature." My question was to provide the links to when the abortion exclusion clause was debated. Not to other amendments.

So I once again reviewed all 20 links on the Bill, from the link you provided me, including the transcripts of the public hearings on the bill on November 22 and 23. There were no instances in any of these documents, where the abortion exclusion was discussed, debated, or mentioned.

Therefore I must assume that the abortion exclusion clause was not debated in the legislature. Please correct me if I am wrong about this assumption.

I asked you what rationale the government had for excluding abortion services from FIPPA. I couldn't find your response to this question in your letter. Perhaps you missed my question? If so, would you be so kind as to answer it for me now?

I asked you why abortion was the only taxpayer funded medical service singled out for exclusion from FIPPA. I couldn't find your response to this question in your letter to me. Perhaps you missed my question? If so, would you be so kind as to answer it for me now?

I asked you how excluding abortion services from FIPPA "enhances openness and transparency in the public sector"? Perhaps you missed my question? If so, would you be as so kind to answer it for me now?

I look forward to hearing back from you soon.

Sincerely,
Patricia Maloney

Open and transparent Ontario government in downward spiral

I finally received my long awaited response from the Ontario Minister of Health, Deb Matthews, regarding my questions to her. And regarding my questions to Premier Wynne.

It is a sad little letter that doesn't actually answer any of my questions, so I'm not really sure why she bothered. Maybe she was just trying to shut me up. 

(I wonder if Deb liked my comic and if Kathleen enjoyed my video?)

Regardless, I'm formulating my reply to her now. Stay tuned.

In the meantime, I know you're dying to read what the Honourable Ms. Matthews wrote, so here it is for your reading enjoyment on this snowy-and-soon-to-be-more-snowy week in Ottawa land.

HLTC2966MC-2013-9720

Thank you for your e-mails advising of your meeting with Madeleine Meilleur, MPP for Ottawa--Vanier, and for your questions regarding records relating to the provision of abortion services, under section 65. (5.7) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FIPPA). Premier Kathleen Wynne has also referred your e-mail of October 21, 2013, on the same matter to me for response.

The passing of Bill 122, the Broader Public Sector Accountability Act, 2010, which contained the provisions that amended FIPPA so as to bring hospitals under FIPPA, followed the customary legislative process, ensuring there was opportunity for public scrutiny, input and open debate. On October 20, 2010, the bill received first reading, and at that time it was publicly available for review.

After second reading on November 16, 2010, the bill was referred to the Standing Committee on Social Policy. The committee held public hearings on the bill on November 22nd and November 23, 2010, at which time eighteen interested parties made deputations to the committee.The bill was also debated several times in the House after both second and third readings. As a result, there was ample opportunity for views on any issues associated with the bill to be considered. For more detail about the passing of Bill 122 the following Legislative Assembly of Ontario Website link takes you to the Bill 122 summary:

http://www.ontla.on.ca/web/bills/bills_detail.do?locale=en&BillID=2420&isCurrent=false&detailPage=bills_detail_status 

Regarding the Canadian Institute for Health Information’s (CIHI) published abortion statistics, I understand that CIHI specifically indicates that when reporting abortion figures, counts of abortions by province are an underestimate count and that it is currently the best way to produce pan-Canadian comparable data.  For information on CIHI’s compilation of statistical data you may wish to contact CIHI directly.

Thank you again for writing. I hope this information is helpful.

Sincerely,

ORIGINAL SIGNED BY

Deb Matthews
Minister
cc: Premier Kathleen Wynne
    Madeleine Meilleur, MPP

Meet your MPP and ask why abortions services are excluded from FIPPA

I met with my MPP Madeleine Meilleur this week, about the recent changes to FIPPA to exclude abortion services. I had already written to her.

(In this meeting, Ms. Meilleur seemed somewhat confused as to what this change to FIPPA actually was. She did state at the end of our conversation that this is not her portfolio [Health]. Understood. But this is her own government's changes to the law. She also didn't know what CIHI was. Again a surprise, especially since the change to the law, and CIHI were both mentioned in her response to my original letter to her.)

I asked her why the government put the abortion exclusion clause into FIPPA.

Ms. Meilleur responded:

"We amended the Freedom of Information Act at the request of the hospitals to maintain the quality and the privacy of the information, so it was not specific to abortion. It's among other things [in the act]. I don't think you would like your private information to be disclosed to the public." 

I explained to Ms. Meilleur, that the change had nothing to do with privacy. That I agree that private information should never be released, however there is no private information in what I'm asking for. I'm asking for totals of abortion statistics, those done in hospitals, in private physician offices and clinics. I said that private and personal information is already excluded from the act. I said that because it is important to have good statistics, and it doesn't matter if you are pro-life or pro-choice, we need to have accurate statistics for all health concerns for women.

I asked her again, saying that I'm just trying to understand why the Ontario government did this. They haven't excluded information for woman who have breast cancer, or knee surgeries. So why did they exclude abortion services?

Ms.Meilleur responded:

"The answer is that at the request of the hospitals, at the request of the physician, this was supported. I know your objective but the objective of this government, and of past governments, who have put in place the Freedom of Information and Privacy Act, so it was added to protect certain information, so this was added, because of concerns the hospitals have, so that's why it's in place."

Again she brought the discussion back to privacy, which is clearly not what this is about. In any event, instead I asked her:

"So are you saying that the hospitals and physicians asked to have this excluded?"

Ms. Meilleur responded:

"When they do an amendment it's not because the government wants an amendment, it's at the request of others and its discussed, and put forward after wide consultation."

When I asked her to expand on that she said:

"Well you know what, I don't know all the details. So I think these questions should be put to the Ministry of Health, as to how it's come about."

So did the government consult the hospitals and doctors on this abortion exclusion clause? First I've heard of this.

She added that consultations were done with the public at large. Again a surprise to me. She said that usually that's the way it's done, the way that amendments are brought about. She said I should ask the Minister and that the Minister would give me specific details. She said she didn't know all the details around the changes.

Then I explained CIHI and their role and asked the question: how can I use CIHI's numbers for research when they are inaccurate? She said didn't know about this organization and couldn't answer my question.

She said that the questions I had asked her in my letter, were sent to the Minister's office, so the response I received would have came from the Minister.

She finished with this:

"Send your questions to the Minister who has the expertise, they have all the answers."

That I did. Write to Ms. Deb Matthews, Minister of Health and Long Term Care. Who has all the answers. I'm dying to know what they are.

I hope others will go to their own MPPs and ask him or her about why this change to FIPPA.

Minister of Health Deb Matthews has all the answers on abortion exclusion clause

I met with my MPP this week Madeleine Meilleur (see here for what she told me).

I have now sent a letter to Minister Deb Matthews with these questions, as per Ms. Meilleur's suggestion. She told me that Deb Matthews has all the answers.

1) First of all, what rationale did the government have for excluding abortion services from FIPPA?

2) Second, since taxpayers fund abortion, in the same way they fund all medical services, why was this one service singled out for exclusion, when no other services were excluded?

Ms. Meilleur's letter of response to me regarding those two questions, stated that "the inclusion of hospitals under FIPPA is a strong indication of the Government's commitment to enhancing openness and transparency in the public sector."

She also mentioned that CIHI publishes Ontario statistics in their report and can be used for "research purposes", and that the changes "were debated in the Legislature".

So based on Ms. Meilleur's response (which didn't actually answer my questions), I added four additional questions for Ms. Matthews.

3. Can you please explain how exempting abortion services from FIPPA "enhances openness and transparency in the public sector"?

4. I agree that CIHI publishes abortion statistics for Ontario. However CIHI's statistics are grossly under reported for numerous reasons including the fact that CIHI does not base their numbers on OHIP billings; abortions done in private physician's offices are not included; and many clinics do not report abortions performed. In fact CIHI's statistics for Ontario are understated by at least 45%.

Please see here for more accurate abortion statistics I did for 2010 based on OHIP billings:
http://run-with-life.blogspot.ca/2012/05/revised-2010-ontario-abortions-tell-sad.html

Can you explain to me how someone doing research into Ontario's abortion statistics, would use information that is inaccurate?

5. The letter states that "These amendments were debated and passed in the Legislature." Can you please provide me with the links to Hansard where the abortion exclusion clause was debated in the Legislature?

6) Ms. Meilleur stated that the changes to FIPPA were made because the hospitals and doctors requested the changes. Can you please tell me how and when these consultations took place. Were they meetings or submitted briefs?

Decrease in rural BC doctors committing abortion

This article in today's National Post has some very good news.

A study published by Dr. [Wendy] Norman in 2011, however, found that the number of physicians providing the service in hospitals in rural British Columbia had dropped 62% between 1998 and 2005. 

That's good news indeed. Less doctors committing abortions.

Dr. Norman said reliable data are not available to analyze changes in the rest of Canada, but Ms. Arthur said anecdotal evidence suggests a similar trend is occurring in most other provinces.

The pro-abortions agree with us on the abortion data situation--as in there is little reliable data. And it's only going to get worse. So why aren't the pro-abortions all over Ontario's killing of abortion statistics? I haven't heard a peep out of them on this.

Pretty funny actually, especially since even Joyce Arthur has to base her information on "anecdotal evidence".

Then this:

She [Dr. Norman] said in an interview that she finds the work rewarding, with the opportunity to counsel patients on future contraception use, but acknowledged it is not a popular career choice these days, especially after a string of shootings of abortion doctors in the late 1990s.

Dr. Norman finds it rewarding to commit abortions? Really? If I was an abortion doctor, I don't think that 's a reason I'd ever make public.

About half of the area’s eight or nine anesthetists still refuse to assist in pregnancy terminations because of personal objections, the doctor said.

This makes sense. That there are doctors who have personal objections to abortion.

I'm looking forward to the day when all doctors have a "personal objection" to committing abortions. Then we won't need to keep abortion statistics at all. And the Ontario Government can hide all the data they want on abortions.

Press Release

For Immediate Release

Blogger Takes Ontario Government to Court over Suppression of Information

OTTAWA , July 18, 2013– “In January 2012, the Ontario Liberal government amended its freedom of information law to exempt any abortion-related data from Freedom of Information (FOI) requests. As a blogger and a member of the new media, I’m taking on the government and challenging them over this undemocratic move. Tax-payers should know how their tax dollars are being spent,” explains Patricia Maloney.

By means of Bill 122, the Broader Public Sector Accountability Act, the Ontario government amended the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FIPPA) to restrict data relating to the “provision of abortion services” from the public. There is no recorded debate in Hansard of this amendment, and it did not come to the public’s attention until after the provision came into effect and Maloney exposed it.

Maloney, the author behind the blog Run with Life, discovered the amendment when the Ministry of Health responded to an FOI request she made in March 2012. After breaking the story on her blog, the amendment caught the attention of the national media. Among others, Margaret Somerville covered it for the Calgary Herald and Barbara Kay wrote about it in the National Post.

“I’m not interested in patient or physician names, or the identification of hospitals. I respect the dual purposes of freedom of information laws; to ensure government accountability by providing information to taxpayers while ensuring the privacy of Canadian citizens. But data relating to provincial trends and rates of a publicly funded medical procedure are fair game,” elaborates Maloney. “The government has not restricted this type of generalized data for any other medical procedure. This amendment is without precedent or justification.”

“And without this data, how will we know if safe-sex campaigns are effective? Or the sex-education program that Premier Kathleen Wynne has promised to introduce?” Maloney asks. “Or if there is a sudden spike in tween or teen abortions? This is an important healthcare issue. And now the public is running blind on a government expenditure previously identified as costing as much as 30 to 50 million dollars each year. ”

In March 2013, the Ministry of Health denied Maloney’s FOI request. Maloney retained constitutional lawyer Albertos Polizogopoulos, and appealed the decision to the Information and Privacy Commissioner (IPC). The IPC upheld the Ministry’s decision stating that the new section to the FIPPA was clear in its exclusion of documents relating to the provision of abortion services. Maloney is now seeking a reconsideration of the IPC’s Order (by the IPC) and a Judicial Review of the Order (by the Ontario Divisional Court).

“As a blogger, Ms. Maloney benefits from the freedom of expression and freedom of the press guaranteed by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms,” explains Polizogopoulos. “The Charter protects her right to comment on matters of public interest. The allocation of taxpayer funds for a medical procedure which remains the source of much controversy is certainly a matter of public interest and the suppression of that information cannot be justified in law.”

-30-

Maloney’s counsel, Albertos Polizogopoulos, is available for comment and interviews. He can be reached at 613-241-2701. For more information on this case, the amendment to FIPPA and additional news coverage, please visit Maloney’s blog at http://run-with-life.blogspot.ca/p/blog-page.html.

How many abortions are done in doctor's offices?

Suzanne Fortin tells us that an Ottawa abortion clinic has been closed.

Good.

This from the Ottawa Sun:
"The College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario forced the Dr. Wee-Lim Sim Medical Practice at 371 Friel St. to stop doing therapeutic abortions after the inspection.

In a July 2011 report, college inspectors wrote that the clinic wasn’t using the “minimum expected standard” of anesthetic for the procedures.

Inspectors also noted a lack of procedure manuals, fire code compliance, safety standards, control over drugs and monitoring equipment."

But here's the thing. That is one doctor's office, in one city, in one province, in Canada. How many other doctor's offices in Canada are also doing abortions, and how many abortions are they doing? We don't know. We do know that CIHI doesn't give us any statistics on these abortions done in private physician's offices. We also know that there were 18,330 of these abortions done in private physician's offices in 2010 (based on a freedom of information request of OHIP billings), and that these numbers are not reported in CIHI's statistics.

So how could this be changed to get more accurate numbers? Well, if CIHI would start basing their statistics on hospital billing records instead of their current method (1). If they made this change, our abortion numbers in Canada would be a lot closer to the true numbers of abortions performed in Canada. And that would be a very good thing.

But CIHI says they can't do that because:
"using fee-for-service (FFS) payments to produce more comprehensive induced abortion statistics at the national level. Our study revealed that the use of FFS payments for induced abortions varies significantly across the provinces and territories; thus this data would not allow CIHI to produce a pan-Canadian comparable series of statistics."

To be honest with you, I'm not exactly sure why this is the case. Couldn't they simply do what I did in Ontario, and ask all the Provincial Ministries of Health to provide them with the numbers of abortions performed in hospitals, clinics and private physician's offices, all based on billing records? If I could do it in Ontario (at least before the Liberals secretly shut it all down), surely it could be done in every province, right? Then we would have a much better idea of the numbers of abortions done each year.

And as an added bonus, all those clinics that don't report their abortion, their data would also now be captured too.

Seems to me if there's a will, there's a way.

1) http://www.cihi.ca/CIHI-ext-portal/pdf/internet/TA_10_ALLDATATABLES20120417_EN
"CIHI captures administrative, clinical and demographic data on induced abortions performed in acute care, day surgery and emergency departments in Canadian hospitals. Data is supplied by provincial and territorial ministries of health, hospitals and independent abortion clinics in Canada. The figures in the following tables include induced abortions performed in a hospital or clinic setting in Canada.

CIHI has explored using fee-for-service (FFS) payments to produce more comprehensive induced abortion statistics at the national level. Our study revealed that the use of FFS payments for induced abortions varies significantly across the provinces and territories; thus this data would not allow CIHI to produce a pan-Canadian comparable series of statistics.

As a result, CIHI will continue to report on induced abortions performed in hospitals and abortion clinics only. While this is probably an underestimate of induced abortions done in the country, it is currently the best way to produce pan-Canadian comparable data."