And just to be clear, if it’s a surrogate mother and the parents change their minds or don’t like how the fetus is developing, it’s still her body, her choice.
Methods of tracking would range from next to useless (anecdotal) to inappropriately invasive (from a mandatory survey prior to the abortion to tracking who gets genetic tests, what the results were and then if these people went on to obtain an abortion). I can’t see an end that would justify such intrusion.
Sex selective abortion happens here too, and it’s almost never for the purpose of aborting males.
As for tracking, the census already does that. If we notice that the percentage of males is increasing, that has social implications. If we notice all the gay people disappearing, that does too.
I had previously withdrawn my point. Yes, churches often do advocate for moral causes, even those (like anti-abortion and anti-gay rights) which I disagree with them about.
Just as any one has the right to self preservation, a woman should have the right to self defense. Her doctor and the woman should be the one’s determining this, not some outsider who does not know her circumstance. It is something that will affect her the rest of her life, regardless of what Choice she makes.
Oh yes. And, as I understand this proposal, that would apply to foetuses after 22 weeks too.
I think that’s a good point in a way, in that, if there are so few (as good as none?) late-term abortions being done for non-medical reasons right now, they don’t need to be legislated against. Otoh, if that’s the case then it’s also true that this proposal would not prevent large numbers of women from having late-term abortions, since they’d still be allowed to for medical reasons.
There may not be many parents who would refuse to donate a kidney to their child if they were a match but I still would not want the government to mandate such a thing.
Okay, fine. Who’s on the hook for raising the severely disabled “fetus” for the next 18 years? Paying the hundreds of thousands of dollars in medical care and therapy? Do we just have Post-23 Week Fetus Homes or something?
You cannot ignore the practical reasons for abortion. In fact, IMO, that’s the only ones we should be debating. You have no invitation nor any right to get into anyone’s else personal morality in this regard.
What about the medical status of the fetus? What if, at 24 weeks, you find out your child is Downs, or missing part of it’s face or any number of really horrible things have gone wrong? Just, too bad, you have to raise and pay for a disabled kid for the rest of your life?
It doesn’t usually take till 24 weeks to find out your child has Down’s. If some states don’t screen until then, then the limit should be higher. I said something similar earlier when explaining why 24 weeks makes more sense to me than 22. UK law allows abortion after 24 weeks if the child will be severely disabled, and that makes sense to me.
Adoption should also be made easier to do - after all, birth itself can cause serious disabilities, and some parents simply can’t look after a severely disabled child well, which isn’t fair on the child or them.