tisonlyi

No-one outside of the parties directly involved should have any input to the decision. At all. The female's choice is absolute, but a touch of arbitration with the male seems, well, polite.

The rights of the 'foetus' come into play when, and only when, there is sufficient development of the foetus to give a reasonable chance of development into a well-functioning human being outside the womb.

The current limits of this are, by my understanding, at around 24-26 weeks.

Foetuses can be 'saved' after 20 weeks or so, but the entity left at the end of the process is decidedly less than a minimally well-functioning human being. I take a very broad definition of well-functioning.

So, up to the point that the foetus starts to have substantial capacity to survive properly, the involved parties have absolute rights.

Oh, and gentlemen, if we dip our 'toe' in shark infested waters and we're bitten by a shark, then we cannot complain about the nature of the shark-infested waters. It's like manslaughter; You may not have intended to kill the person, but pushing them near a cliff-edge is behaviour that is likely to result in death. You should know this, as a reasonable person, so you're guilty. If your sperm ends up fertilizing an egg, then you've had a role to play in that, no matter how much protection you were taking.

Unintended consequences abound in life. Deal.

__________________
"I do not agree that the dog in a manger has the final right to the manger even though he may have lain there for a very long time. I do not admit that right. I do not admit for instance, that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America or the black people of Australia. I do not admit that a wrong has been done to these people by the fact that a stronger race, a higher-grade race, a more worldly wise race to put it that way, has come in and taken their place." - Winston Churchill, 1937 --{ORLY?}--