Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-mp689 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-16T05:46:18.070Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Litigating Parentage: Equality Rights, LGBTQ Mobilization and Ontario’s All Families Are Equal Act

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 November 2017

Dave Snow
Dave Snow*
Affiliation:
Assistant Professor Department of Political ScienceUniversity of Guelphsnow@uoguelph.ca
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

After a judge declared its parentage regime violated the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, in 2016, Ontario passed the All Families Are Equal Act (AFAEA), which recognized LGBTQ families and parents of children born through assisted reproduction. This article analyzes the legislative hearings on the AFAEA, and highlights three factors that shaped the final policy outcome: a coordinated group of progressive witnesses with legal expertise; the presence of “rights talk” to inflate the scope of the judicial ruling; and the government’s use of the Charter as both “shield” and “sword” to minimize conservative opposition. This highlights how the Charter can shape policy outcomes not just in the courtroom, but also during the lawmaking process. It also demonstrates that activists are now using the Charter—particularly the equality rights provisions—to change policy for two groups facing discrimination: trans parents and individuals using assisted reproduction.

Résumé

Après qu’un juge ait déclaré, en 2016, que le régime ontarien de filiation violait la Charte canadienne des droits et libertés, l’Ontario a édicté la Loi de 2016 sur l’égalité de toutes les familles, laquelle reconnaît les familles LGBTQ et les parents d’enfants issus de la reproduction assistée. Le présent article analyse les audiences législatives de la Loi de 2016 sur l’égalité de toutes les familles et souligne les trois facteurs ayant eu un impact sur la politique finale : un groupe coordonné de témoins dotés d’une expertise légale; des discussions sur les droits afin d’accentuer la portée de cette décision judiciaire; et enfin, le recours à la Charte par le gouvernement à la fois comme bouclier et comme épée pour minimiser l’opposition conservatrice. Ceci illustre à quel point la Charte façonne les résultats en matière de politiques non seulement au tribunal, mais également dans le cadre du processus d’élaboration des lois. Cela démontre également que les activistes emploient dorénavant la Charte, notamment les dispositions concernant l’égalité des droits, pour changer les politiques visant deux groupes aux prises avec la discrimination : les parents transgenres et les personnes ayant recours à la reproduction assistée.

Keywords

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedomsequality rightsLGBTQlaw and politicsassisted reproductionCharte canadienne des droits et libertésdroit à l’égalitéLGBTQdroit et politiquesreproduction assistée
Type
Articles
Information
Canadian Journal of Law and Society / La Revue Canadienne Droit et Société , Volume 32 , Issue 3 , December 2017 , pp. 329 - 348
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Law and Society Association / Association Canadienne Droit et Société 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References

Baker, Dennis. 2016. Checking the Court: Justifying Parliament’s Role in Constitutional Interpretation. Supreme Court Law Review 73 (2): 1–16.Google Scholar
Bateman, Thomas M. J. 2012. Human Dignity’s False Start in the Supreme Court of Canada: Equality Rights and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. International Journal of Human Rights 16 (4): 577–97.Google Scholar
Benzie, Robert. 2016. Tory leader Patrick Brown apologizes for sex-ed “mistake.” Toronto Star, August 29. https://www.thestar.com/news/queenspark/2016/08/29/brown-accused-of-sex-ed-flip-flop.html (accessed October 8, 2017).Google Scholar
Canada. 2016. Government Notices – Department of Health: Assisted Human Reproduction Act. Canada Gazette 150 (40): October 1. http://www.gazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p1/2016/2016-10-01/html/notice-avis-eng.php#ne1 (accessed October 9, 2017).Google Scholar
Csanady, Ashley. 2016. One in six Ontario parents considered pulling kids from school over new sex-ed curriculum: poll. National Post, June 3. http://nationalpost.com/news/politics/one-in-six-ontario-parents-considered-pulling-kids-from-school-over-new-sex-ed-curriculum-poll (accessed October 9, 2017).Google Scholar
Egale Canada. 2017. Glossary of Terms. Available at http://egale.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Egales-Glossary-of-Terms.pdf Google Scholar
Epp, Charles R. 1996. Do Bills of Rights Matter? The Canadians Charter of Rights and Freedoms. American Political Science Review 90 (4): 765–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glendon, Mary Ann. 1991. Rights Talk: The Impoverishment of Political Discourse. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Harder, Lois. 2015. Does Sperm Have a Flag? On Biological Relationship and National Membership. Canadian Journal of Law and Society 30 (1): 109–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harvison Young, Alison. 2001. The Changing Family, Rights Discourse and the Supreme Court of Canada. Canadian Bar Review 80 (2): 749–92.Google Scholar
Hnatiuk, Dana. 2007. Proceeding with Insufficient Care: A Comment on the Susceptibility of the Assisted Human Reproduction Act to Challenges under Section 7 of the Charter. University of Toronto Faculty of Law Review 65 (1): 39–61.Google Scholar
Hogg, Peter W., and Bushell, Allison A.. 1997. The Charter Dialogue Between Courts and Legislatures (Or Maybe a Charter of Rights Isn’t Such a Bad Thing After All). Osgoode Hall Law Journal 35 (1): 75–124.Google Scholar
Hogg, Peter W., Bushell Thornton, Allison A., and Wright, Wade K.. 2007. Charter Dialogue Revisited – Or “Much Ado About Metaphors”. Osgoode Hall Law Journal 45 (1): 1–66.Google Scholar
Hutchinson, Allan C. 1995. Waiting for Coraf: A Critique of Law and Rights. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Jones, Allison. 2016. All Families Are Equal Act Passes: Same-Sex Parents In Ontario Won’t Have To Adopt Own Kids. Huffington Post, November 30. http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2016/11/30/all-families-are-equal-act-bill-28-wynne_n_13326140.html (accessed October 9, 2017).Google Scholar
Kelly, Fiona. 2009. (Re)Forming Parenthood: The Assignment of Legal Parentage within Planned Lesbian Families. Ottawa Law Review 40 (2): 185–222.Google Scholar
Kirkup, Kyle. Forthcoming. After Marriage Equality: Courting Queer and Trans Rights. In Policy Change, Courts, and the Canadian Constitution, ed. Macfarlane, Emmett. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Knopff, Rainer. 1998. Populism and the Politics of Rights: The Dual Attack on Representative Democracy. Canadian Journal of Political Science 31 (4): 683–705.Google Scholar
Knopff, Rainer, Evans, Rhonda, Baker, Dennis, and Snow, Dave. 2017. Dialogue: Clarified and Reconsidered. Osgoode Hall Law Journal 54 (2): 605–40.Google Scholar
Macfarlane, Emmett. 2008. Terms of Entitlement: Is there a Distinctly Canadian ‘Rights Talk’? Canadian Journal of Political Science 41 (2): 303–28.Google Scholar
Macfarlane, Emmett. 2013. The Court in Government and Society: Dialogue, Public Opinion, and the Media. In Governing from the Bench (chapter 6). Vancouver: UBC Press.Google Scholar
Manfredi, Christopher P., and Kelly, James B.. 1999. Six Degrees of Dialogue: A Response to Hogg and Bushell. Osgoode Hall Law Journal 37 (3): 513–27.Google Scholar
McColl, Mary Ann, Bond, Rebecca, and Shannon, David W.. 2016. People with Disabilities and the Charter: Disability rights at the Supreme Court of Canada under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Canadian Journal of Disability Studies 5 (1): 183–210.Google Scholar
McIntyre, Sheila, and Rodgers, Sanda. 2006. Diminishing Returns: Inequality and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Markham, ON: LexisNexis.Google Scholar
Morton, F. L., and Knopff, Rainer. 2000. The Charter Revolution and the Court Party. Peterborough: Broadview Press.Google Scholar
Ontario. Legislative Assembly. 2016a. Official Report of Debates (Hansard). 3 October. 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. http://www.ontla.on.ca/house-proceedings/transcripts/files_pdf/03-OCT-2016_L011.pdf Google Scholar
Ontario. Legislative Assembly. 2016b. Official Report of Debates (Hansard). Standing Committee on Social Policy. 17 October. 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. Bill 28, All Families Are Equal Act (Parentage and Related Registrations Statute Law Amendment), 2016. http://www.ontla.on.ca/committee-proceedings/transcripts/files_pdf/17-OCT-2016_SP002.pdf Google Scholar
Ontario. Legislative Assembly. 2016c. Official Report of Debates (Hansard). Standing Committee on Social Policy. 18 October. 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. Bill 28, All Families Are Equal Act (Parentage and Related Registrations Statute Law Amendment), 2016. http://www.ontla.on.ca/committee-proceedings/transcripts/files_pdf/18-OCT-2016_SP003.pdf Google Scholar
Ontario. Legislative Assembly. 2016d. Official Report of Debates (Hansard). Standing Committee on Social Policy. 1 November. 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. Bill 28, All Families Are Equal Act (Parentage and Related Registrations Statute Law Amendment), 2016. http://www.ontla.on.ca/web/bills/bills_detail.do?locale=en&BillID=4176&detailPage=bills_detail_debates Google Scholar
Ontario. Legislative Assembly. 2016e. Official Report of Debates (Hansard). 29 November. 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. http://www.ontla.on.ca/house-proceedings/transcripts/files_pdf/29-NOV-2016_L036.pdf Google Scholar
Ontario. Legislative Assembly. 2016f. Ontario Passes Law Ensuring Equal Recognition for All Parents and Children. November 29. https://news.ontario.ca/mag/en/2016/11/ontario-passes-law-ensuring-equal-rights-for-all-parents-and-children.html (accessed January 7, 2017).Google Scholar
Ontario. 2017. General, RRO 1990, Reg 1094. https://www.canlii.org/en/on/laws/regu/rro-1990-reg-1094/latest/rro-1990-reg-1094.html#history (accessed October 9, 2017).Google Scholar
Radbord, Joanna. 2016. The Birth of Bill 28: Reconceptualising Parentage in Ontario. Prepared for the Law Society of Upper Canada Six-Minute Lawyer / Family Law Summit (on file with author).Google Scholar
Roach, Kent. 2001. The Supreme Court on Trial: Judicial Activism or Democratic Dialogue? Toronto: Irwin Law.Google Scholar
Rushowy, Kirstin. 2016. New MPP Oosterhoff calls parenting bill “horrible legislation.” Toronto Star, 29 November. https://www.thestar.com/news/queenspark/2016/11/29/new-mpp-oosterhoff-calls-parenting-bill-horrible-legislation.html Google Scholar
Sanguiliano, Anthony. 2015. Substantive equality as equal recognition: A new theory of Section 15 of the Charter. Osgoode Hall Law Journal 52 (2): 601–46.Google Scholar
Smith, Miriam. 2005. Social Movements and Judicial Empowerment: Courts, Public Policy, and Lesbian and Gay Organizing in Canada. Politics and Society 33 (2): 327–53.Google Scholar
Snow, Dave. 2012. The Judicialization of Assisted Reproductive Technology Policy in Canada: Decentralization, Medicalization, and Mandatory Regulation. Canadian Journal of Law and Society 27 (2): 169–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snow, Dave. 2016. Measuring Parentage Policy in the Canadian Provinces: A Comparative Framework. Canadian Public Administration 59 (1): 5–25.Google Scholar
White, Linda A. 2014. Federalism and Equality Rights Implementation in Canada. Publius: A Journal of Federalism 44 (1): 157–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Young, Claire, and Boyd, Susan. 2006. Losing the Feminist Voice? Debates on the Legal Recognition of Same Sex Partnerships in Canada. Feminist Legal Studies 14 (2): 213–40.Google Scholar

Cases Cited

A.A. v. B.B ., [2007] O.N.C.A. 2.Google Scholar
Andrews v. Law Society of British Columbia , [1989] 1 SCR 143.Google Scholar
Egan v. Canada , [1995] 2 SCR 513.Google Scholar
Grand et al. v. Ontario (Attorney General) [2016]. (Interim order and minutes of settlement)Google Scholar
M.D. et al. v. L. L. et al . [2008] 90 O.R. (3d) 127.Google Scholar
Reference re Same-Sex Marriage , [2004] 3 S.C.R. 698, 2004 SCC 79.Google Scholar
Rutherford v. Ontario (Deputy Registrar General) , [2006] 81 O.R. (3d) 81.Google Scholar