For those who think abortion should be illegal: continued

Last week, I made this post, hoping to survey people who think abortion should be illegal. It's not going so well; the post is getting hits, but nobody is answering the survey.

Well, not nobody. One person has. So that person is lucky enough to get personal responses today. Please keep sharing! I want more data.

Q1: What ought to be the criminal penalty for (a) the doctor; (b) the woman; (c) any coconspirators in the commission of an abortion?

Well, that would depend on whether it's going to be classified as a civil or criminal offense. I would push for it to be a criminal offense, which carry harsher punishments. I would want to do more research before providing more of a response.

I apologize for any confusion, but I am specifically talking about making abortion criminal. It doesn't really make sense to call it a civil matter, as I don't see who would have the standing to sue the pregnant person, the doctors, or the coconspirators. I suppose the argument could be made that someone has the right to sue on behalf of the fetus, but that opens up the same nightmare that any "personhood" amendment does. If a fetus is subject to all rights and responsibilities that go along with personhood, lots of legal absurdities would result, like the possibility of me being able to sue my fetus for various torts associated with the pregnancy.

Regarding having to do more research, do it. If you want to push to criminalize abortion, you need to be able to answer this question.


Q2: How is law enforcement to determine whether an aborted pregnancy was spontaneous or intentionally sought?

I don't see how someone could have a spontaneous abortion, unless they were pro life and there are circumstances that make them change their views. I would only support the change in view due to rape or incest. Definition of spontaneous; performed or occurring as a result of a sudden inner impulse or inclination and without premeditation or external stimulus. If you are pro choice (there is your premeditation) you already know whether or not you'd have an abortion.

Once again, there appears to have been a disconnect in terminology. A spontaneous abortion is a miscarriage.

However, based on the answers given below, it seems as though this respondent is indeed in favor of investigating miscarriages (and in my opinion it's inconsistent to support the criminalization of abortion and not support investigating all miscarriages). The question remains: how do you figure out whether it's an abortion or a miscarriage?

Finally, this person says they do support a potential "change in view" for rape or incest, which severely undermines a position that abortion is murder. Regardless of the manner of conception, if abortion is murder, then there should not be an exception for the innocent victim.

Q3: Hypothetical: I fall down the stairs in my house and have a miscarriage. Do you investigate?
Q4: Hypothetical: Out of nowhere, I come out of rugby retirement and get hardcore. Three weeks later I have a miscarriage. Do you investigate?

Yes to both, and the following comment: 3 & 4 are not simple yes or no questions.

Except that's what you're trying to make them. In my world, where abortion is a private matter, circumstances like this are between a pregnant person and their doctor, and other close support that the pregnant person chooses to surround themselves with. In your world, circumstances like this must have a presumption of illegality, and I don't see how you can want abortion to be illegal and not support investigations.

So, points to the respondent for consistency, but do you have any idea what you're asking? To investigate every miscarriage would be ridiculously expensive and traumatizing for many people who have suffered miscarriages. Furthermore, I can't imagine that you can gather enough evidence of intent under these circumstances. So basically you're asking to spend a lot of money on fruitless investigations that will be emotionally difficult for vulnerable individuals.

Q5: Do you allow abortion in the case of pregnancy resulting from rape? If yes, how much evidence of the rape is required before the abortion can take place? If no, please address the conundrum of the woman - or the child - who would rather commit suicide than carry a pregnancy to term.

Yes. Depends on the case.

I'll repeat again that the manner of conception should not be relevant to the murder of the victim. To support abortion in case of rape is to completely undermine the argument that abortion is murder. And if a person would rather commit suicide than carry a pregnancy through childbirth, regardless of the manner of conception, where's your pro-life?

Q6: Do you allow abortion in the case of fetal abnormality? If yes, how do you determine which fetal abnormalities allow the pregnant woman to access abortion? If no, how many severely disabled children have you cared for?

No. I take care of six children, seven hours a day, five days a week. 

Even if all six of the children this respondent takes care of are severely disabled, thirty-five hours a week does not qualify you to dictate to a person pregnant with an injured or disabled child that they must undergo this responsibility for the rest of their lives. It especially doesn't qualify you to dictate to anyone else that they must go through the expense and trauma of the pregnancy and childbirth to watch the child, once born, die a painful death within a week.

Q7: Do you allow abortion in the case of the pregnancy threatening the woman's life? If yes, how "threatened" does the woman's life have to be to access an abortion? Can women who have high-risk pregnancies have abortions on demand? 

No. No.

Now, this one baffles the hell out of me, because it's the easiest one to justify with murder laws. The justification argument here involves a right to "kill" the fetus in self-defense if the pregnant person is in danger. I hope that this respondent or anyone who agrees with them will elaborate on what exactly elevates the fetus's value over its host, 'cause that's just horrible.

Q8: Please comment on the fact that doctors typically refuse to perform elective tubal ligations on women of child-bearing age.

It's crap. Just like the fact that women can get sterilized for free but not men.

Perhaps I am indeed living on a different planet from the respondent. Not only could I not get sterilized for free in my 20s and 30s when I knew I didn't want kids, but I couldn't get sterilized at all. That is the point of the question. No matter how badly I wanted to get sterilized, they wouldn't do it, because "I might change my mind," i.e., I can't be trusted to make a decision about my own reproductive health.

Regardless, it sounds as though in theory, the respondent and I might be on the same page in promoting elective sterilization for all, free of charge (of course, I support all health care being available "free of charge" in a universal health care system, but that's another topic).

Q9: How many adopted/foster children do you have?

None.

If you're going to crow about forcing pregnant people to give birth regardless of their desires, then you have to step up to take care of the newborns if the host doesn't want to. You can force a person to give birth; you can't force them to be a parent.

And this is where I find the anti-choice crowd to be the cruelest. Your respect for "life" stops at childbirth; indeed, it's a pro-birth philosophy, not a pro-life philosophy. This tends to be the crowd that doesn't want to pay for a social safety net; as soon as these kids are born, they're basically on their own.