Summary#

This bill would change the Criminal Code to make pregnancy an explicit aggravating factor at sentencing. It does not create new crimes. It tells judges to consider tougher sentences when an offender abuses someone they knew was pregnant, or when a pregnant victim suffers physical or emotional harm from the offence (Bill, amending Criminal Code s.718.2(a)(ii.2)-(ii.3)).

• Judges must treat two facts as aggravating: the offender knew the victim was pregnant and abused her; or the offence caused physical or emotional harm to a pregnant victim (Bill, s.718.2(a)(ii.2)-(ii.3)).
• The change applies at sentencing for any offence; it does not change guilt or innocence (Criminal Code s.718, s.718.2).
• “Emotional harm” is not defined in the bill; courts would interpret it (Bill text).
• The bill does not address medical procedures and does not create a separate offence related to pregnancy (Bill text).
• If enacted, it would apply to sentences imposed after it becomes law (general rule on coming-into-force; Bill has no special date clause).

What it means for you#

• Households and pregnant people:
  • If you are pregnant and are the victim of a crime, the prosecutor can ask the judge to treat this as an aggravating factor. This can lead to a tougher sentence within the legal range (Bill, s.718.2(a)(ii.2)-(ii.3)).
  • The court may consider emotional harm (such as fear, anxiety, or trauma) as well as physical harm. The bill does not define “emotional harm” (Bill text).
• Defendants:
  • If convicted of a crime where you abused someone you knew to be pregnant, the judge must treat that as aggravating at sentencing (s.718.2(a)(ii.2)).
  • Even if you did not know the person was pregnant, if the offence caused physical or emotional harm to a pregnant victim, that is also an aggravating factor (s.718.2(a)(ii.3)).
  • These factors can affect plea talks and may result in longer sentences within existing limits.
• Prosecutors and defense counsel:
  • Prosecutors would present evidence that the victim was pregnant and, for subparagraph (ii.2), that the offender knew it. They may also present evidence of emotional or physical harm (s.718.2(a)(ii.2)-(ii.3)).
  • Defense counsel may contest knowledge and the scope of “emotional harm,” which is undefined (Bill text).
• Judges and courts:
  • Judges must state how they considered these aggravating factors when they apply (Criminal Code s.718.2).
• Corrections systems (provincial/territorial and federal):
  • If judges impose longer sentences due to these factors, custody time could increase. Data unavailable.

Expenses#

Estimated net cost: Data unavailable.

• No appropriations, new programs, or fees are created in the bill (Bill text).
• Canada does not publish a fiscal note for this private member’s bill. Data unavailable.
• Any cost effects (for example, from longer average sentences) depend on judicial decisions and case mix. Data unavailable.

Proponents' View#

• It denounces and deters violence against pregnant women by making pregnancy an explicit aggravating factor in law (Preamble; s.718.2(a)(ii.2)-(ii.3)).
• It ensures consistent consideration across courts, reducing gaps where pregnancy might be overlooked at sentencing (s.718.2(a)(ii.2)-(ii.3)).
• It recognizes both physical and emotional harm, reflecting real impacts on pregnant victims (s.718.2(a)(ii.3)).
• It targets sentencing only and does not create new offences or change abortion law (Bill text).
• The knowledge requirement in subparagraph (ii.2) focuses on cases where the offender knew of the pregnancy, aiming to avoid unfairness (s.718.2(a)(ii.2)).

Opponents' View#

• Redundant: judges can already consider pregnancy-related harm under existing sentencing principles that account for the gravity and circumstances of the offence (Criminal Code s.718, s.718.2).
• Vague drafting: “emotional harm” is undefined, which could lead to inconsistent rulings and more appeals (Bill, s.718.2(a)(ii.3)).
• Fairness concern: the second aggravator does not require that the offender knew of the pregnancy, yet could still increase the sentence (Bill, s.718.2(a)(ii.3)).
• Implementation risk: added litigation to prove knowledge of pregnancy and to delimit “emotional harm” could lengthen proceedings; no estimate of impacts (Data unavailable).
• Cost concern: if sentences increase on average, incarceration costs could rise without clear evidence of deterrence benefits; no fiscal estimate (Data unavailable).