Let’s say you’re at home with you’re newborn, you’re a single mom by yourself during winter. A very severe snowstorm hits and the power goes out but luckily you have a kerosene gas furnace for heat, you have enough perishable food to last you for a while as well. You have no means of communication, you’re car cannot make it through the snow, and the nearest house is miles away. Let’s say you become extremely exhausted, sleep deprived – you realize that taking care of a newborn seems much more physically/emotionally demanding than pregnancy, so you’ve had enough, is it acceptable to revoke consent in caring for your newborn? Of course, I believe (hopefully) that no one would say that it is acceptable but here’s my point; if consent can be revoked at any time, for any reason (not my words) then this should be acceptable, right? The mother is using her body to take care of another human being who cannot, in any way, take care of themselves. According to pro-choicers, nobody has the right to use somebody’s body without their consent. So, the mother revoked her consent because it was emotionally/physically demanding and draining (same reasoning pro-choicers give to justify abortion). The only way the mother can end the physical and emotional strain of taking care of another human being full time is to, unfortunately, cause harm (in this case it wouldn’t be as direct and gory as an abortion) like in the case with abortion. Now, my answer to this scenario is the same answer for abortion; you care for that human being until someone else can, in the above scenario that could possibly take 2-4 weeks, with pregnancy, 9 months. The point I’m trying to make is that consent cannot be revoked at any time if someone is in your care. The right and moral thing to do is care for them until someone else is willing to (if you feel no longer up to the task) no matter how long that may be. Also, I know this scenario is out there but it’s a thought experiment.
Consider a mother who must nurse her newborn child because there is no baby formula available, such as in the African bush. There are no other women in her village who are lactating and no animals available to milk. Should she have the right to refuse to nurse her child and let them die if she decides to revoke consent? This is exactly what abortion does. A preborn child is essentially nursing from their mother for the first nine months of life via their umbilical cord and continue to nurse via her breasts following birth.
Question human abortion.
Thought Experiment
