I have no difficulty in seeing the necessity of terminating an early pregnancy for the sake of the mother. This is true, whether it's the physical safety of the mother-host or her mental or emotional stability. I'm fairly pragmatic. (If the ability to conceive were given to both sexes, I suspect this discussion wouldn't occur.)

In an ideal world, each pregnancy would result in a wanted child. (Duh!) What I have a problem with is the stance that each of us knows what is best for the rest of us and that we have the right to enforce it. And it infuriates me that the same people who insist on overseeing and regulating other people's options are often the same people who are not willing to provide options for the same children once they are born.

Where I really stand is on the belief that there should be no question of legality. To me, this is an issue between each woman and her medical doctor and her god. Obviously, the father should also have a voice but imo, it is subject to being over-ridden by that of the mother. That view too is pragmatic: the father can have dozens of children; the mother is physically and emotionally impacted by each pregnancy.

For me, as a mother, whether and when the fetus has human consciousness (not just the viability of sustaining life outside the womb)is going to influence my choice of what to do regarding the pregnancy.

There was a time when no one had any sure knowledge of electricity and the argument could have been made that no one will ever know how it is formed, guided, controlled, even just what it is. I believe the time will come when the mental, emotional life of a fetus will be charted.

In the meantime, the courts should keep their hands off.

Elva Bontrager