I am strongly pro-choice; I believe a woman should be able to terminate a pregnancy no matter how late in the gestational period or what her reasons are. I often discuss things with my father who is pro-choice but sometimes struggles with the more specific issues surrounding the topic.
The other day we were talking about Amillia Taylor, world's most-premature baby, "believed to be the first baby to have survived following a gestation period of less than 22 weeks". It got me thinking about late term abortion.
A woman's right to her own bodily integrity is the most important thing, of course. But if a doctor is going to kill the foetus and remove it - why not remove it alive, absolve her of all responsibility and put it into the adoption system? She has not 'become a parent' and she has had her pregnancy ended as she wanted.
I'm struggling, I suppose, with the idea of late term abortion. What is the difference between killing a 22-24 week old foetus and removing it from the mother's body, and allowing it to be born and then killing it? The first is seen as acceptable and the second unacceptable... but why?
I guess what I'm asking is - why kill the foetus in a late term abortion? Could it not just be treated as a premature birth with a view to the baby going into adoption? The mother has gained the same thing she wanted in the first place, and the foetus/baby has not been killed.
I'm not saying I do or do not believe we should do this - I am unsure about it which is why I am asking for the opinions of the esteemed members of this community. Hopefully others can look at this from other perspectives which will help me (and others) to get a more rounded view of the issue. Thank you in advance for your input.
Cross-posted to feminist.