Partial ectogestation and the right to choose the method by which one ends one's pregnancy.

This article examines the potential impact of a future technology called partial ectogestation on the abortion debate. Partial ectogestation involves removing a non-viable fetus from a pregnant person's body and gestating it using an artificial support system. The article explores arguments suggesting that abortion may be unjust once this technology is available and questions whether there will still be a right to abortion. The author presents a new defense of abortion that allows for the right to choose the method and timing of ending a pregnancy. The article also discusses the invasiveness of the transfer procedure and the distinction between abortion and the right to end an unwanted pregnancy. It examines Judith Jarvis Thomson's defense of abortion and its relevance to partial ectogestation, arguing that a pregnant person has the right to end an unwanted pregnancy by removing the fetus, even if it results in the fetus's death, as long as it is not an unjust killing. The article explores different interpretations of Thomson's views in the context of the abortion debate and partial ectogestation. It emphasizes the importance of considering a pregnant person's rights and freedoms when discussing the termination of pregnancies. The author suggests that a pregnant person has the right to refuse transfer and choose the method of removing the fetus, including abortion. The article also discusses the moral aspects of abortion and acknowledges the complexities of the issue. [Extracted from the article]