Suppose a woman decided, for whatever reason, to put a pregnancy 'on hold'

Suppose a woman decided, for whatever reason, to put a pregnancy 'on hold'

Suppose a woman decided, for whatever reason, to put a pregnancy 'on hold' indefinitely, even for the rest of her life, while the fetus was at a stage of development in which it is currently permissible to abort it. That is, the woman takes a potion and stays pregnant, but the fetus remains insider her and dependent on her, and it never develops any further than it already has. I think many people would find this morally problematic in ways in which they don't find abortion problematic. But where is the moral difference?

Read another response by Richard Heck
Read another response about Abortion