Four nurses from Calgary's Foothills Hospital who were interviewed by this magazine earlier this year said they were being forced by their employer, the Calgary Regional Health Authority, to assist with a procedure they found morally repugnant. The procedure, known as genetic termination, involves the induced, late-term birth of babies diagnosed with genetic anomalies that are presumed to be serious. Three of the nurses, all of whom insisted on anonymity for fear of losing their jobs and licences, described six specific incidents where such babies were born alive and subsequently died. Calgary Reform MP Jason Kenney registered a formal complaint with the Calgary Police Chief Christine Silverberg, alleging that the genetic terminations may be a violation of the Criminal Code.

Last week, police announced that their investigation was over, and that they had found no evidence of criminal misconduct. They said they had investigated only one case of genetic termination and interviewed no nurses. They also said they had been rebuffed in their attempts to interview the head of obstetrics, Ian Lange. Dr. Lange, in turn, insisted he had never been approached by police. Outraged pro-life lobbyists have been joined by at least one Calgary MP in suggesting the police investigation was half- hearted and incomplete, likely because of political interference higher up.

It is not clear if the one genetic termination investigated by police is the same as the most detailed and disturbing one described to this magazine by nurses. In that instance, a birth was induced five weeks before its due date. The baby, born alive, was held and rocked by staff, but no attempt was made to save it by administering nutritional fluids and oxygen. (Nurses report that withholding positive treatment is standard CRHA procedure in genetic terminations.) It finally expired 12 hours after birth.

One of the investigating police officers, Constable Colin Acheson, said in a July 14 interview with this magazine that he thought that the 12-hour survivor case might be the same one he was investigating. "It sounds like it is," he said. Last week's press release announcing the completion of the investigation stated that "Evidence in the possession of investigators at this time indicates that the infant was provided proper palliative care."

Whether "palliative care" rather than life-saving intervention was the appropriate response is something neither the nurses nor the CRHA have ever clearly stated. The CHRA always pleads "patient privacy" with respect to individual cases, and the nurses object to the whole business of killing babies because they may be handicapped. However, they were not asked any questions by police, so the police know only what was put in one file, and made no effort to verify its contents. The nurses say they had hoped that police would interview all the staff on the unit, which would have ensured their anonymity.

Even more questions attend the failure of the police to interview Dr. Lange. When the allegations of possible criminal misconduct were first raised, he denied that genetic terminations were occurring at Foothills. Later, he admitted that "induction of labour for infants with a lethal abnormality" occurs, adding that when such babies are occasionally born alive, they "may" be given oxygen, in addition to fluids, cuddling, and even "fluids in the vein." In a statement to the Calgary Herald on July 29, supplied by CRHA spokesman Roman Cooney, Dr. Lange said, "We said we'd co- operate [with police] in any way we can. However, police never asked us for an interview."

Const. Acheson, on three occasions, complained to this magazine that Dr. Lange only claimed to be co-operative at news conferences. In May, the officer said he was "pissed off" with the obstetrician. "This case got dumped on us," Const. Acheson griped. "A day after watching arrogant Dr. Ian Lange at news conferences, talking about how he'd co-operate so fully with any investigation, that he welcomed an investigation, I called Lange up, spoke to his secretary. Asked for an appointment. The secretary said, yes, I'll set one up and call you back. Five minutes later, a criminal lawyer called. Ian Lange's defence attorney. 'What do you want with my client?' he asked." In another interview June 17, Const. Acheson grumbled that after three weeks of investigation, the only "witness" he had been able to interview was a reporter for this magazine.

When police concluded their two-month investigation last week, they still had not talked to any nurses or doctors. Instead, they relied on "written documentation" that Foothills' hospital officials "easily and quickly" provided police, after they arrived at the hospital with a search warrant. Police Inspector Mike Cullen suggested that nurses at the hospital knew the police were conducting an investigation and could have come forward. Their failure to do so, he said, left police "investigating faceless, nameless allegations from people who won't come forward to back up their claims with facts."

In a July 14 interview, Const. Acheson said the "lies of the hospital, different stories, semantics" made in public statements by Dr. Lange and others "do not form part of this investigation." He emphasized that he did not think "the CRHA has cooked up anything or forged anything," to thwart the investigation, but he allowed that he would like to "ask Dr. Lange a few things. I'd like to ask a few questions about all this rhetoric."

The police had information that would have enabled them to talk to a couple who had had a genetic termination in May 1998, but they chose not to pursue that lead. Const. Acheson's partner in the investigation, Detective Jim McCaw, explained why in a June 17 interview: "How would you feel if you lost a child, and the police called you later to do a criminal investigation and blame someone for the death?" Besides, added Det. McCaw, " it's not as if this baby was thrown in a closet and ignored."

Interview transcripts show Det. McCaw and Const. Acheson becoming irritated by questions about their progress. When the latter was asked if they had sought out the parents whose baby was terminated, he became visibly angry. "No, we certainly didn't talk to the parents!" he shouted. " That's a decision made by the parents, how much treatment is given to the child. Why would we go up and call a woman who's been through this and ask her if the baby had been given fluids or oxygen...phoning [a] woman and making something out of something that doesn't exist because nurses don't have the grit to come forward and not make nameless faceless allegations? Why would we phone [a mother] after what she's been through! You're certainly not suggesting this was a criminal matter!"

Calgary Reform MP Art Hanger, a longtime Calgary policeman before he entered politics, says the comments indicate the police were "not interested in investigating" the allegations. "For these guys to be this cocksure of themselves, somebody high up at the police department has instructed investigators to follow this route." Mr. Hanger calls the Foothills' controversy an "embarrassment" to the provincial government. " The last thing the government wants is one of these incidents in their hospital. This matter has become so politicized that even the police can't do their job. I didn't think they were so shallow. In other words, they never did an investigation," Mr. Hangar concludes.

Alberta Pro-Life president Joanne Hatton wants to know who has "ever heard of a criminal investigation in which witnesses aren't contacted and questioned especially when the police have a list of the employees?" Another law enforcement officer, after reviewing transcripts of this magazine's taped interviews with the Foothills' investigators, says he has " considerable doubt about the manner in which this investigation has been conducted." The officer, with a 25-year record of service, says, "I would no more wait for the nurses to come to me than I would wait for people I found in a bar where someone had been shot to come to me."

Ordinarily, according to the officer, an investigation would have included " questioning all the nurses and support staff working in the unit in question, since it was obviously from among this group that the information originated. I would take a written statement from each nurse. I would have reviewed all of the relevant medical records prior to these interviews, and showed nurses photocopies of the documents during the interview process to identify entries in records, and supplement the records with additional information from the nurses when necessary. This would also provide an opportunity to confirm that no documents were missing and that none had been altered."

Edmonton lawyer Mark McCourt is convinced that failing to interview nurses at the Foothills hospital, and neglecting to investigate all possible charges under the Criminal Code, is motivated by political reasons, not legal ones. The lawyer points out that "police never said nothing happened. They're saying their investigation was thwarted, that they weren't able to gather sufficient evidence." The CRHA's Mr. Cooney disputed claims of a political cover-up last week, saying, "We are confident the city police conducted a thorough investigation. The complaint was unfounded."