Search

The majority of the literature focused on whether consent should be extended to the adolescent population arises from themes adapted from American tort law. In contrast to the USA, Ontario does not delineate an age of consent for medical treatment and relying on American guidelines to guide practice in Ontario is problematic. While the literature is saturated with discussions for and against seeking adolescent consent, there are currently no bioethical guidelines on adolescent consent in the province of Ontario. This paper explores adolescent refusal of care and adolescent request for care in opposition to parental wishes. The paper seeks to answer the following questions: What is the difference between an adolescent and an adult in medical decision-making? What are the barriers to seeking adolescent consent? And, can the neurobiological argument be an accurate guide for obtaining adolescent consent? [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As both a marriage act and an immigration act, the Expatriation Act of 1907 restricted U.S. women's freedom of marriage by stating that marrying aliens would lead to loss of U.S. citizenship. To study the effects of the Expatriation Act, I conduct a statistical analysis using 1910 full-count U.S. census data. I find that the Expatriation Act of 1907 generated significantly negative effects on intermarriage between American women and foreign-born men, particularly noncitizens. In particular, I find that it was the citizenship, rather than men's non-U.S. origin, that accounted for the negative effects of the Expatriation Act of 1907 on intermarriage. These results show a decline in male immigrants' marital assimilation, and potentially social and economic assimilation. As for the magnitude, the effects were large: the decline in intermarriage was at least 15 percent relative to the pre-Act intermarriage rate. Besides these main results, selective emigration to Canada and Europe driven by intermarriage cannot explain the main empirical results of the paper. The Expatriation Act of 1907 also had no significant effects on women's entry into the marriage market. Finally, the effects of the Expatriation Act of 1907 on intermarriage were heterogeneous by family immigration background, but less so by geographic region. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Canada has recently emerged as a hotspot in a burgeoning global surrogacy bio‐economy. On the grounds that any commercial trade in reproductive capabilities would result in the exploitation of marginalised women willing to sell their eggs and wombs, Canada's Assisted Human Reproduction Act (AHRA) bans commercial surrogacy, allowing only for altruistic arrangements. Drawing together analysis of the AHRA and related legal, regulatory, and policy documents, feminist political economic theory, and a growing body of critical social scientific scholarship on surrogacy, this paper troubles altruism as a means of insulating surrogacy from market‐based exploitation. It contributes to the extant literature an explicit focus on the law as a key site in the reproduction of the gendered division of labour. Acknowledging the serious concerns that dog commercial markets in reproductive biology, it argues that the legal constitution of gestational work as altruistic is part of a broader juridico‐economic apparatus that has systematically devalued reproductive labour under capitalism. Efforts to insulate surrogacy from the market by legally designating it as a gift freely given facilitate the ongoing appropriation of reproductive labour, which is assigned, once again, to the realm of non‐value. A feminist political‐economic critique of altruism, this paper does not forward an argument in favour of commercialisation. Rather, its aim is to upend the commercial/altruistic binary that has circumscribed so much of the thinking and legislating around surrogacy. This paper explores the role of the law in devaluing reproductive labour under capitalism. It does so via an examination of Canada's burgeoning surrogacy bio‐economy and the legislation – the Assisted Human Reproduction Act – designed to regulate it. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Canada's Trans Mountain Expansion Pipeline project is one of the country's most controversial in recent history. At the heart of the controversy lie questions about how to conduct impact assessments (IAs) of oil spills in marine and coastal ecosystems. This paper offers an analysis of two such IAs: one carried out by Canada through its National Energy Board and the other by Tsleil-Waututh Nation, whose unceded ancestral territory encompasses the last twenty-eight kilometers of the project's terminus in the Burrard Inlet, British Columbia. The comparison is informed by a science and technology studies approach to coproduction, displaying the close relationship between IA law and applied scientific practice on both sides of the dispute. By attending to differing perspectives on concepts central to IA such as significance and mitigation, this case study illustrates how coproduction supports legal pluralism's attention to diverse forms of world making inherent in IA. We close by reflecting on how such attention is relevant to Canada's ongoing commitments, including those under the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the 1970s, three Canadian jurisdictions (federal, Quebec, Nova Scotia) introduced statutory unjust dismissal legislation. The objective was to extend 'just cause' protections long enjoyed by unionized workers to eligible non-union employees by permitting employees to file a complaint with a labour tribunal. The presumptive remedy for unjustly terminated employees was to be reinstatement. However, in practice the majority of successful complainants are not reinstated. This paper examines the history and rationale for the introduction of unjust dismissal legislation in Canada, the meaning and scope of 'unjust' as developed by adjudicators, and the approach of tribunals in the three jurisdictions to crafting remedies to compensate unjustly dismissed employees who are not reinstated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]