Better minds than mine - is this scenario a false equivalency for abortion?

[phylny]

I am pro-choice, so I need no convincing regarding keeping abortion safe and legal for anyone who wants one. I was trying to think of a way to come up with a narrative to explain why no one should impose their will upon another person's personal and medical decisions. With a forced pregnancy, you undergo a medical procedure (pre-natal care, birth, aftercare), your body will change, and you may or may not be left with scars.

Here's my scenario: Your child/sibling/parent needs a liver transplant. Now, the liver regenerates so yes, you'll have a medical procedure, your body will change, but it'll turn out more or less how you started, minus some scars. Should you be legally obliged to submit to surgery to keep your loved one alive - even if you don't want to (I know you should not) because you're saving a life?

Please help me shape this or let me know if I'm on the right or wrong track. I'm sure someone smarter than me has figured this out

[JenniferJuniper]

1. No need to complicate things.

It's simple. While an embryo or non-viable fetus is human life, it is not a human being.

Women are human beings. If a human being does not wish to carry that non-viable and completely dependant fetus/embryo to term for any reason whatsoever, that's her call. Not yours, not mine, and certainly not the government's.

Humans have always valued human beings over other life forms. The only reason so many assholes vault embryos over women is because they want women back in their "proper place" in society.

[MissB]

2. In either scenario

you may or may not be left with life. Pregnancy is no walk in the park- it can actually bring you right up to the doorstep of death at any point along the way.

Liver transplant surgery isn’t without risk of death either.

It’s pretty much my number one reason for supporting abortion as a choice. You can’t force me to the brink of death. It’s my choice whether I go through the 9 months of carrying a fetus to term.

And hey, I’ve done it twice. Neither time was a walk in the park. It isn’t just: get pre-natal care, pregnant, give birth. So very much can go wrong.

[Greybnk48]

3. It would be very nice of you to give someone

part of an organ, or one of your organs, but as an autonomous agent you are not morally obligated to do so. There is no coherent moral argument/obligation to back up any such law without arguing that one person has more value than the other.

Just like you're not obligated to dive on a grenade in a foxhole to save other people because your buddies in there are much younger, or healthier, or smarter than you are.

Again, many people would donate an organ or part of one, but your worth and suffering is not inherently less valuable than someone else's as far as moral obligation goes (unless you're a utilitarian, then start doing the moral calculus, lol).

This is not a false equivalency. Read this, it may help: http://spot.colorado.edu/~heathwoo/Phil160,Fall02/thomson.htm