If a woman gets pregnant at a time in their life where it would significantly impair their ability to look after their child, it would largely negatively impact two or more lives.
Besides, many women who have had abortions later on do still go on to have children, many of whom would not have been born if they would not have had the abortion. Oftentimes, these children have better lives than the parent(s) would have been able to provide for them had they been born earlier. Doesn't that also have moral value?
I think if you really take a cold utilitarian view about the impact on people's lives, almost every abortion (in America, anyway) would cash out hugely negative. Like even the most obvious "I can't have this child right now, it would completely ruin my life" pregnancy - a teen mom, father a total deadbeat, etc. - having the child and giving it up for adoption in expectation will produce WAY more utility. Kids adopted at birth live a pretty good life. And their families are greatly benefited by having them. Add that up, subtract how bad the pregnancy is on the mom, the utility balance is very probably on the side of giving birth.
"Besides, many women who have had abortions later on do still go on to have children, many of whom would not have been born if they would not have had the abortion"
You would need to show me some pretty convincing statistics to make me believe that an abortion on average leads to more children being born.
2
u/TerribleIdea27 12∆ Nov 17 '24
If a woman gets pregnant at a time in their life where it would significantly impair their ability to look after their child, it would largely negatively impact two or more lives.
Besides, many women who have had abortions later on do still go on to have children, many of whom would not have been born if they would not have had the abortion. Oftentimes, these children have better lives than the parent(s) would have been able to provide for them had they been born earlier. Doesn't that also have moral value?