Backhouse: the celebrated abortion trial of dr Emily stowe
Article Overview
Title: The Celebrated Abortion Trial of Dr. Emily Stowe, Toronto, 1879
Author: Constance B. Backhouse
Significance: Emily Howard Stowe, first white woman to practice medicine in Canada, was tried for allegedly procuring an abortion in 1879.
Context: Stowe's status as a feminist activist attracted significant medical and legal scrutiny, making her case a noteworthy event in Canada’s history of women's rights and medical practice.
Emily Howard Stowe's Background
First white woman practicing medicine in Canada, faced barriers due to gender.
Attempted to gain access to medical education in Canada but was barred due to her gender; studied in the U.S. instead.
Opened a medical practice in Toronto without a medical license, attracting a significant female patient base.
Influential in women's rights, founded societies aimed at enfranchising Canadian women.
Education and Professional Challenges
Stowe started medical studies at an American homeopathic college in New York City, graduating in 1867.
Sought medical licensing in Ontario but faced repeated rejections due to gender.
Despite the challenges, her practice continued to grow, forcing her to expand premises.
In 1870, Stowe and fellow student Jenny Kidd Trout were the first women admitted to the Toronto School of Medicine amidst considerable harassment.
The Murder Trial Context
Incident: The case was triggered by the death of Sarah Ann Lovell, a young, unmarried domestic servant whose body was later found to contain a male fetus.
Stowe had prescribed medication for Lovell, who was suspected to be pregnant but had not yet experienced quickening.
Coroner’s inquest revealed Lovell had visited Stowe shortly before her death, raising questions about the nature and intent of the prescription given.
Coroner's Inquest Findings
Coroner and medical examiners could not determine the cause of death, initially suspect foul play.
Testimony pointed to Lovell visiting Stowe for assistance regarding her menstruation, which she believed was interrupted.
At the inquest, Stowe cited her professional experience and educational background but declined to disclose whether she was a licensed practitioner.
Legal Implications and Trial
Charges were escalated to a criminal indictment after the inquest, focusing solely on abortion rather than death.
Stowe pled not guilty and maintained her position throughout the trial.
The trial drew public attention, particularly from women's groups supporting Stowe.
Medical witnesses criticized the prosecution's arguments, highlighting the uncertainty in linking Stowe's prescription to Lovell's death.
Defense Arguments
Defense lawyers argued that merely prescribing medication did not equate to administering an abortion.
Stowe's defense focused on her lack of intent to induce an abortion and her efforts to help Lovell.
Medical experts testified that Stowe's prescribed dosage was not substantial enough to cause serious harm.
Verdict and Aftermath
The jury acquitted Stowe, attributing Lovell's death to factors unknown rather than directly linking the cause to her prescription.
The acquittal was notable, given the strict legal environment surrounding abortion at the time, often resulting in severe penalties for offenders.
Stowe's trial reflected broader societal tensions regarding women in medicine and reproductive rights during the 19th century.
Impact on Women's Rights Movement
By 1880, Stowe finally received her medical license, paving the way for future women doctors in Canada.
Stowe later became involved in key feminist movements, advocating women's education, rights, and healthcare.
Her case highlighted the need for greater dialogue around women's bodily autonomy and the medical profession's response to reproductive health issues.
Conclusion
Emily Stowe's trial reveals the intersectionality of gender, law, and medicine in 19th-century Canada.
It exemplifies the struggles women faced in asserting their professional identities while navigating societal expectations and prejudices.
Stowe’s story is significant not just for her individual struggle but also as part of the larger narrative of women's rights in Canada.