Doc: "I didn't think the discussion expressly excluded natural pregnancy. My understanding was what effect an artificial womb would have on the concept of fetal viability, period."<quoted text>
I didn't think the discussion expressly excluded natural pregnancy. My understanding was what effect an artificial womb would have on the concept of fetal viability, period. Even if an artificial womb existed woman would still be getting pregnant naturally. Under those circumstances a 10 week old fetus could technically be considered viable because by definition it could be removed from it's natural womb and kept alive artificially until such time that it could survive independent of ANY ALS. STO believed that since the artificial womb was still technically a womb, then the fetus at 10 weeks would not be considered viable.
In any case if the woman decided she wanted to abort at 10 weeks would she agree to have the fetus transplanted into an artificial womb ? Some might not. And in that sense abortion as an issue would not go away. That was my point.
Yes, I remember it was about viability, with or without ALS, and the artificial womb being the ALS.
I was thinking the discussion was just in terms of women who were [using] the artificial wombs, viability being limitless for the fetuses in the artificial wombs, and how abortion wouldn't be an issue for them.
Of course if the discussion included natural pregnancies, abortion would still be an issue, and I do understand your point about that.