Abortion - We might as well talk about it

My guess is that this is not going to be the only post about abortion on this blog. The issue is complex and divisive.

While there should be no need for me to say this, let me just offer up some personal information. I have never had an abortion. It is very unlikely that I would ever choose to do so. I, personally, do not feel that abortion is a choice I would make for myself in any circumstance I think it is likely I may find myself in. I have one son, and I am currently eight months pregnant with my second child. None of this is really anyone's business but mine (and my family) but I'm trying to avoid turning this discussion into a question of my personal choices by laying out the information up front.

Now that we have that out of the way....

I am pro-choice. Although the right may like to say this means I am pro-abortion, that is not true. I think that generally speaking, the fewer abortions there are, the better off we are as a country. I also personally think that the fewer unplanned pregnancies there are, especially as the result of sexual encounters between couples that are not strongly committed to one another, the better off we are as a country. I also think that my personal beliefs about "what is best" do not trump the law.

Anti-abortion activists say that abortion is murder, and therefore, it is appropriate for the state to outlaw abortion. I find that argument severely lacking in a legal sense.

Judith Jarvis Thomson offers an analogy in her 1971 writing "A Defense of Abortion." A variation of her argument would be this.

Suppose one night, Mary gets very, very drunk. She does many stupid things that night and makes many bad choices. Eventually, she passes out. She awakes to find herself in a hospital, hooked up to another person by various machines. She asks what has happened.

The hospital personnel inform her "Well, you made bad choices last night. Just before you passed out, you came up to this floor of the hospital, and entered the life support wing. We clearly labeled this wing, and provide multiple verbal and written warnings that if you choose to enter this wing, and you happen to have the ability to provide life support to someone in need, we will restrain you and hook you up to provide life support to another person. You had sufficient warning, but you made a bad choice anyway. "

"So now, you will need to stay here for the next 9 months. Your blood, ingested nutrients, etc, will be used for the benefit of this other human who will die without the life support your body can provide. While the risks are relatively low, it is possible that your life and health could be compromised by this. You almost certainly will suffer financial losses as a result. Your family and friends will know about your poor choices. Tough."

This analogy is similar to pregnancy in many ways. Yes, it is true - one would hope that by this day and age, the majority of women understand that sex carries a risk of pregnancy. And yet, some women make the abysmally stupid choice of having sex (or worse, unprotected sex) when they have no desire to have children.

However, there is a difference between killing someone, and refusing to support their life with the resources of your own body. If I walk outside and stab someone to death, I have murdered them. I actively stolen their life.

If I walk outside, and encounter someone that desperately needs a kidney just like mine in order to live, and I refuse to donate one of my kidneys, I have not murdered anyone. I have stolen nothing from no one. At worst, I have declined to use my body to support the life of another. And no one would suggest I have a legal obligation to do so.

In the case of a pregnancy, the legal obligation is even less. Pre-viability, there is no independent life to steal or deny. No one can guarantee that at the end of any particular pregnancy, the end result will be new life. Any woman who has experienced a pregnancy, and worried over every odd twinge, or blood spot, or odd feeling, knows just how uncertain life is. Approximately 25% of pregnancies end in miscarriage, and other pregnancies may result in a stillbirth. If there is no legal obligation to provide the use of your body to another person to ensure they live, how can there be a legal obligation to use your body to provide the potential for life to what may, one day, possibly be another person?

The question becomes more complicated after the point of viability. I think that the basic framework that allows abortion in the 1st and 2nd trimesters, and places severe restrictions on abortion in the 3rd trimester is a very practical approach to this issue. Post-viability, the state has two lives to balance against one another. The woman has had 6 months to act to preserve her bodily integrity.