WI-1T1Y FREE PRE3SS, WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 29, 198 6, PAGE 5 -"I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostiLity against every form of tyranny over the mind of man."- Thomas Jefferson Advise nd Dissent Unnatural selection Eve la a mentaily bandicapped woman who, until she was 21lyears old, lived witb ber mother ln Summerside, P.E.I. She was tben sent to a special school for mentaily retarded aduits where she met and formed a close friendship with a young man. Eve's mother was worried about tbe possibility of ber daughter becomlng pregnant and applied to the courts to havehber sterilized. The case bas wound its way tbrougb several appeals and finaily last Thur- sday, after eight years, the Supreme Court-of Canada ruled against the request and in s0 doing ruled tbat non-therapeutie sterilization may flot; be performed witbout tbe consent of tbe patient regardless of tbe mental capabilities of tbe lndivldual and tbeir ability to provide informed consent. I flnd tbe broad applications of this ruling very dlsturbing. I'm certainly not in favor of wholeèale sterilization of tbe mentally handicapped but for the court to rule that sterilization can neyer be performed witbout consent except for. tberapeutic reasons (to treat a speclfic illness) separates completely the con- cepts of rlgbts versus responsibilities. The court in effect ruled tbat Eve was entitled to become pregnant and bave children regarâless of ber abillty to take care of tbem or raise tbem - thaý responsibllty would be assumed by ber motber, a social agencey or the gover- rnent. Iadeed, tbe court does not seem to bave given any consideration to tbe rlghts of thechlld who mlgbtresult from their decision. Many "normal" adults cboose sterilization (vasectomny, tubai ligation) as a means of llmiting tbeir familles or to maintain a particular lifestyle, yet tbe court bas ruled tbat no-one can make tbat cbolce for anotber even ln tbat par- son's best interests. If a person is regarded as incapable of making tbe decision, tben sterilization cannot be done; Ratber than protecting tbe rlgbts of the ban- dlcapped, I would argue tbat the court bas infringed on tbeir rlgbts by banning procedures tbat many "normal" people find simple, convenient and beneficial. When people are given rigbta, tbey accept tberesponsibilities associated witb tbem. For instance, wben somebody gets a driver's licence, be is given the "1rigbt" to drive. He accepts the responislbility to, obey the laws of tbe road and if he doesn't, be must bear tbe penalties. Tbe traffic laws are designed to provide reasonable limitations-on our "1rigbts" so that ail driveracan equaily sbare the road and not tread on eacb otber's toes. As another example, freadom of speecb is limlted by libel laws. If I were to slander sorneone, I would be infringing on tbefr rlghts and tbe law limita my fraedom of speecb to prevent tbat. In Eve's case, the Supreme Court bas ruled that procreation la evary woman's rigbt. If Eve were "normal", sbe would be considered responsible for ber cbildren; but if Eve cannot care for tbem, they would become wards of the state and ail taxpayers would be paying for Eve's right. lIa person is incapable of caring for a cbild, surely it la a reasonable limitation on that person's righta to prevent tbemn from baving tbat cbild. I bave been dlacusaing this issue in quite general terms bacause tbat is bow tbe Supreme Court handled it. Neitber Eve nor ber motber was ever publically identified and henca we don't know bow severely bandicappad Eve was. Some mentaily bandicapped people are capable of raising children but sorne are littie better than vegetables -vegetables witb asexual libido. Obvlously, for tbe cbildren's sake, tbe latter sbould not be allowed to bave cbildren. There are only a faw cboices left for institutions caring for tbeae people - the women could be given birtb control pilla along witb otber medication, but thia la probably just as mucb an infringernent on tbeir righta as sterilization; tbe men could be sterilized (an infringement on tbeir rigbts); or tbe sexes could ba strictly segregatad whicb would lead to cbarges of unnatural restrictions. Eve's mother probably believed tbat she was acting in tbe bast interests of ber daughter. We are neyer told wbetber Eve berself was opposed to the oparation or wbetber sbe was simply incapable of providing informed consent. Nevartbelesa, a number of patient advocate groupa took up tbe case and bave now won a vlctory for wbat tbey consider to be their individual dignity - their rlght to beprotected from over-zealous doctors and meddling parents. Tbese groupa were qulte rightly concerned about the abusive number of routine hysteractomies performed on mentally bandicapped young women "for the convenience of tbe staff of tbe institution". Ironically, Eve's case does not appear to bave fit tbat pattern. In some ways the problem bas been created by modemn medicine. One of tbe chief advances of medicine bas been to dramaticaly cut tbe infant mortality rate. Fifty or sixty years ago, a large proportion of our mentally baadicapped population would bave dled at or near birth - now we can keep tbem aliva. At that tinie, the daath of a malformed infant was mourned but was accepted as normal and for the beat - now we spare no expense to preserve tbe lives of infan-. ta wbo will continue to burden society for the reat of their lives. la this truly a medical advance or la it vanity - tbecballenge and the pride of keeping ever youngar preemies and ever worse deformities alive? For wbat? Not oaly do they live and grow up but now the Supreme Court bas in affect said tbat they bave every right to bave chi.jdren of their own. Many forma of retardation are genetic - tbese genes wil now be passed to succeeding generations. Maaklad, tbe end result of billions of yaars of evolution, bas now decided tbat natural selection, the long slow process which developed our. in- telligence and our ability toasee beyond tomorrow, is no longer applicable. The result wil be de-evolution. On Theý Whitby' Beat By Peter Bramma Walk don't mn Do you evar fiad that you are rusbing for no ap- parent reason. It's so easy to get drawn into the fast pace of our sociaty, that it seema as if you are "fighting the dlock" througbout tbe wbole day. My wife and I have a favourite way to take tirne out from the "human race". Walking ... but recently, it seama that aven wben walking wa sometimes end up rushing. Let me explain. Here wa are out for a nica ralaxing walk and as we approach the intersection I push the button for the "walk" signal. As the traffic cornes to a stop for the rad light, on cornes the signal. Looking carafully to maka sure the traffic la stopping we step off the curb and start to cross. About one third of tbe way acroas the intersection we notice that the walking man bas disappeared and the dreaded red hand la rapidly flasbing at us. Seeing this, we wonder what to do. The curse of the red band bas struck again. Sbould we ratura to the curb and try again or quickly rua to the other aide. We opt to quickly çross and arriva shakea at the othar aide. Standing there with hearta pounding we wonder what's going on at traffic engineering. Wby did they shortan the crossing time? Have they not considered pedestrians at ali wben timing the ligbta. Are we second clasa citizans when on foot? Don't thosa enginears realiza that the world's firat traffic signal, erectad in London, England in 1868, was in- stalled atrictly for the purpose of allowing pedestrians to safely cross the street. And bere I arn taking an ualiurriad walk aad they end up rushing me acroas the roadi Wall, the situation la that the traffic enginears have been thinking us, and their concern bas lad tbem t o maka the walk signal shor- ter. Doas that make sense? Wben it'a axplained, it should. In lata August I received a phone cail from Mr. Dava McMullen. Dave is the. Traffic Operations .Manager for tbe Region of Durbam. He told me tbat be bad raceived a number of complainta about tbe "walk" signal baing shortened. Dave wondered if be could explain tbe reason té me and tben I could relay the information through this column. So bere it la: In reality tbe time available to cross tbe road is tbe same as it waa. Tbe "don't walk" signal bas been lengtbaned and the "walk" signal sbortened. This was done to ensure that pedeatrians do not atart to cross wben there la insufficient time to make the other aide safely. If you bave entered tbe croasing on tbe "waUc" signal and wbile croasing the "don't walk" signal cornes on, don't panic. You still bave lota of time to make tbe otber aide, providing you don't dwadle, as tbis pbase is now longer. Tbe flasbing light is to be traated tbesanme way as a driver uses an amber ligbt (if the light cornes on while your vehicle is in tbe intersection your o.k., but if you bave not yet entered the inter- section and you can stop safely, you must not en- ter). If the "don't walk" signal is flashing and you are about to cross, do not enter tbe roadway. It is not only illegal, but you'd neyer make it acrosa to tbe otber side in time. It's best to be patient and wait for the "walk" signal on tbe next phase. Remem- ber, patience,_la a virtue. The steady red "don't walk" signal means tbat the green light ia about to turn to amber and the traffic you are crossing in front of will soon get the green light. Mr. McMullen mentioned another-point during bis caîl. Apparently motorista, finding pedestrians stili on the roadway wben the "don't walk" signal is flashing.. are giving pedestrians a bard time. ]Rude remarks and gestures, horn blowing,'and forcing the person off the roadway, are some of tbe thinga pedestrians have encountered. The motorista in- volved were usually impatiently waiting to make a rigbt or left turn. Drivers must- realize, if -a padestrian lawfully (with tbe walk signal or green light) antered the roadway in order to cross, ha or she may continue crosaing aven if tbe light changes. As long as the pedestrian la crossing as quickly as reasonably possible (~Walking not runaing) the padestrian bas the right of way over drivers wan- ting to cross their patb. Recent Ontario figures show that about one in avery five people killed in traffic, and one in every 15 injured in traffic are pedestrians. Also, children 15 and under plus senior citizens 65 and over, ac- counit for almost balf of padestrian fatalities and in- julies. The safest place to cross the streat la at an intersection. If thare are lighta, use tbem properly while always remembering to cbeck the traffic before stepping off tbe curb. Remember, it's no good to be "dead" and "Iright".. m