Most people are for or against abortion. Some say it depends on circumstances, but sometimes it gets complicated.
A Canadian couple discover their fetus was likely to have Down’s Syndrome and decided to abort.
But the fetus was being carried by a surrogate, who doesn't want to abort.
What happens now? What would
YOU do?
Quote:
Under the agreement signed by the couple and the surrogate, this would mean that the parents were not legally responsible for raising the child. But the situation sparked a new debate over the potential need for government intervention and oversight in contracts between parents and the women who carry their children.
Many ethicists feel strongly that the surrogate-parent relationship is too delicate to have contract law applied to it, saying that in such cases, the child becomes a product rather than a person.
|
How do you not step on the rights of the parents, or the surrogate, before you even get into whether the fetus is a person with rights or not.
Quote:
The problem is that although parents have the right to decide whether they want to raise a child with birth defects (and I would argue, have the right to abort the fetus when they are carrying their own child), the surrogate’s presence adds the complication of another adult who should be given input over what happens to her body. If the parents feel that they can’t raise the child, they should not be compelled to do so simply because they were having the child with the help of a surrogate – that would, ultimately, be cruel to both the parents and the child.
But if the surrogate is opposed to abortion for any reason, she should not be compelled to have one. The question is whether the surrogate is then compelled to raise the child herself, and what rights the parents have. What if the surrogate wants to give the baby up for adoption? Are the parents obligated to help her do so – and if not, are they obligated to give her monetary support?
|
Maybe the only way out is the parents, surrogate and fetus become soylent green?
LINK