Fraser Health Reassures Public by Cutting Ties with Controversial Centre

Fraser Health has taken a significant step by severing ties with Hope for Women Pregnancy Services, a crisis pregnancy centre that has faced criticism for promoting an anti-abortion agenda. The health authority’s decision comes after concerns were raised by multiple abortion rights organizations about the implications of partnering with such a centre.

Crisis pregnancy centres, often faith-based, present themselves as neutral entities while advocating against abortion. Earlier this summer, Fraser Health announced plans to collaborate with four community organizations to conduct breastfeeding and chestfeeding workshops, one of which was Hope for Women, established in 2014 under the auspices of Abbotsford Right to Life. The involvement of this organization prompted alarm from three abortion rights groups, which urged Fraser Health to distance itself from Hope for Women.

Joyce Arthur, executive director of the Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada, emphasized the importance of this separation. “Fraser Health took our concerns seriously and updated its social media posts, removing all references to Hope for Women,” she stated. In a communication to The Tyee, Fraser Health clarified that it does not maintain any partnership, funding relationship, or service contract with Hope for Women. The health authority noted it provides education on infant feeding based on training previously offered to volunteers associated with the centre.

Arthur highlighted that any association with crisis pregnancy centres can create a “public perception of support” that undermines the credibility of health services. In Canada, abortion services are regulated under the Canada Health Act, with no specific abortion law in place. This regulation ensures that abortion is treated like any other medical procedure, making it accessible and free of charge. Notably, individuals seeking abortion services in British Columbia do not require parental consent or a doctor’s referral.

Access to accurate information is crucial for individuals navigating unplanned pregnancies. Teale Phelps Bondaroff, chair and co-founder of AccessBC, emphasized the need for all options to be presented in a judgment-free and informative manner. He pointed out that crisis pregnancy centres often fail to provide comprehensive information, which can mislead those seeking assistance.

Arthur provided insights into identifying crisis pregnancy centres, noting that websites claiming not to be medical facilities and not referring for abortions are likely to be misleading. The existence of these centres has raised concerns about their tactics, as they may create an illusion of medical legitimacy while pushing an anti-abortion agenda.

In response to public scrutiny, some crisis pregnancy centres have begun to clarify their positions. For instance, Hope for Women explicitly states on its website that it “does not provide or refer for abortions as we are not a medical facility.” Arthur criticized this approach as “disingenuous,” arguing that offering a referral to a nearby abortion clinic should not be a challenge for any organization.

The issue extends beyond misinformation; it touches on the emotional vulnerability of individuals facing unplanned pregnancies. Phelps Bondaroff pointed out that a delay in accessing proper abortion services can have significant implications, affecting the type of procedure available or even the possibility of obtaining one altogether.

The potential for confusion between legitimate medical clinics and crisis pregnancy centres poses a significant risk. Many of these centres employ peer counselling, but Arthur cautioned that such support may not be trauma-informed or professionally trained. This lack of professional oversight raises ethical concerns, especially given their goal of dissuading individuals from choosing abortion.

Ian Bushfield, executive director of the BC Humanist Association, expressed frustration over the tactics used by crisis pregnancy centres, stating that they often rely on unsubstantiated claims regarding abortion risks while downplaying the relief many individuals experience after undergoing the procedure. He underscored the need for a supportive environment where individuals can make informed decisions without judgment.

As the conversation surrounding abortion services continues to evolve in Canada, the actions taken by Fraser Health reflect a broader commitment to ensuring that individuals in vulnerable situations receive accurate information and support. The health authority’s decision to distance itself from Hope for Women serves as a reminder of the importance of transparency and integrity in health services.