ab- ‘away, from’ + oriri ‘be born’
To “bring to a premature end because of a problem or fault”.
I am ProChoice*.
For many reasons:
The potential mother is already alive, self sustaining, cognitively aware, and able to make an informed decision on the use of her body as an incubator.
During development it takes around 24 weeks for the ability to perceive and process various stimuli.
If the pregnancy wasn’t intended then there wasn’t any intended potential for the new life anyway so there is no loss per se
If there is reason to believe the child/mother won’t have a worthwhile life then the continuation is not in the best interests of those involved.
If the pregnancy is unwanted then what right do we have to say someone must go through with such a commitment? One which changes life in so many ways?
Imagine growing an unwanted baby, painfully giving birth, sustaining and rasing a child, everything that goes with it. Imagine the mental torture that would mean.
If this life were the will of a god as described by Abrahamic religious doctrine, there is nothing we could do to stop it.
My summary reason is
If a pregnancy isn’t intended and contraceptive methods are used, but fail, then an unwanted pregnancy is a problem. A problem which if caught early enough can be handled with minimum discomfort and psychological harm to the adult in question.
All these points are based on a form of consent by the adult party. I don’t feel qualified to comment on the situation of an underage person becoming pregnant as consent in both conception and abortion are both very delicate topics which require the cognitive ability to process the information regarding what the outcomes would be or have been.
But I would stress that education is a necessary part of consent. One cannot consent without knowledge and understanding. Even if one were to choose the abstinence method of avoiding pregnancy, that is no reason not to educate on other options, especially when we live in a world where rape is an unfortunate possibility.
I wrote this from the point of the mother’s right based on biology. There are a few considerations that lie outside this scope.
Care of those born prematurely is of such a high standatd in my UK experience, that potential viability of the fetus has a rather earlier timeframe. In order to minimise crossover in treatment of underdeveloped cases, I would personally prefer a cutoff point closer to 13 weeks than the established 24 weeks.
The availability of the procedure should not be viewed or promoted as a form of post-event contraception. Whilst I appreciate accidents/crimes happen, the risks and consequences involved merit a considered approach.
Whilst women have the right to parental freedom based on biology, they also reserve these rights after birth. i.e. the mother can give up the child for adoption without the fathers consent. The option to opt out of fatherhood should be provided for. Until potential fathers have the same parental freedoms (not to force an unwanted abortion on the mother, but relating here to more the legal aspects of rights/responsibilities beyond the incubation) my stance must be that an inequality under the law is not fair. As such I am prochoice for both parents and cannot recognise the mothers post-birth rights until such a time as they are extended to fathers.