The case being addressed in this essay is: Winnipeg Child and Family Services (Northwest Area) v. D.F.G. The topics being addressed in this essay will be provided through a summary and an analysis, explaining the case through legal liberalism and feminist legal theory in relation to the majority decision and the dissenting decision. I personally, agree with the reasoning of the majority decision and will prove why.
Summary
The nature of the proceeding in the case of Winnipeg Child and Family Services (Northwest Area) v. D.F.G is an appeal. The name of the court hearing the proceedings was called the Manitoba Court of Appeal. The judges writing the majority decision are: Lamer C.J. and La Forest, L’Heureux-Dube, Gonthier, Cory, McLachlin, …show more content…
The first legal issue is in relation to tort law. As tort law currently stands if a permit is ordered from the Court to detain a woman that is pregnant against her wishes but in order to protect the unborn child she is currently caring. Her actions will harm the child overall. The second legal issue comes from the other perspective. If the Court does have the power to make orders based on the protection of children (or unborn children), and can this be extended to protect the child against the mothers …show more content…
However, there are main elements of the legal liberalism theory. The first one is “judges don’t just ‘find the law’, they ‘formulate it’”. This means that judges adjust the law to fit modern day society but the legislature formally fixes it. The next element is judges do not form their idea of what justice is based on rules or precedents, they start from what they believe justice is. The next one is every choice they make they do not just look it up in law they have to make many choices before they come to a conclusion. They draw on previous cases, the persons record, the laws and many other things. It is not just a simple minded decision; the answer is not there in law. The final element of legal liberalism is, that you must look at all the factors that have an effect on the legal actors when the judges are making choices. The majority decision relates to legal liberalism in many ways. The majority decision in this case reflects legal liberalism in many ways. Firstly, legal liberalism protects peoples’ liberty in this case, the only person’s liberty to be protected here was that of the mothers. Her unborn child under Canadian law is not a legal person. In the law’s eyes there was no person to liberty to protect here besides the respondent. “ If it was not a legal person and possessed no legal rights at the time of the
Summary
The nature of the proceeding in the case of Winnipeg Child and Family Services (Northwest Area) v. D.F.G is an appeal. The name of the court hearing the proceedings was called the Manitoba Court of Appeal. The judges writing the majority decision are: Lamer C.J. and La Forest, L’Heureux-Dube, Gonthier, Cory, McLachlin, …show more content…
The first legal issue is in relation to tort law. As tort law currently stands if a permit is ordered from the Court to detain a woman that is pregnant against her wishes but in order to protect the unborn child she is currently caring. Her actions will harm the child overall. The second legal issue comes from the other perspective. If the Court does have the power to make orders based on the protection of children (or unborn children), and can this be extended to protect the child against the mothers …show more content…
However, there are main elements of the legal liberalism theory. The first one is “judges don’t just ‘find the law’, they ‘formulate it’”. This means that judges adjust the law to fit modern day society but the legislature formally fixes it. The next element is judges do not form their idea of what justice is based on rules or precedents, they start from what they believe justice is. The next one is every choice they make they do not just look it up in law they have to make many choices before they come to a conclusion. They draw on previous cases, the persons record, the laws and many other things. It is not just a simple minded decision; the answer is not there in law. The final element of legal liberalism is, that you must look at all the factors that have an effect on the legal actors when the judges are making choices. The majority decision relates to legal liberalism in many ways. The majority decision in this case reflects legal liberalism in many ways. Firstly, legal liberalism protects peoples’ liberty in this case, the only person’s liberty to be protected here was that of the mothers. Her unborn child under Canadian law is not a legal person. In the law’s eyes there was no person to liberty to protect here besides the respondent. “ If it was not a legal person and possessed no legal rights at the time of the