The difficulty of the pro-choice position

I was reminded in a meeting today how difficult it must be for pro-choice people to be consistent on what they believe. Someone was describing an FASD conference she had been at. Discussion turned to the 1996 case in Manitoba of the pregnant woman who had already had several FASD children and how the law tried to force her into treatment. The supreme court overturned this, as the law does not recognize a baby as a person until after birth.

But most people, no matter what their views on abortion, do not want FASD children born into the world. So it is a really hard line to say that a woman should have the right to do whatever she wants with her own body when what she does impacts her child for the rest of that child's life. Many people in the FASD world seem to be turning to the notion that both a mother and baby should be supported, that you don't have to sacrifice one for the other.

Bingo. Pro-lifers have been saying that for years.

I'm also amazed that pro-choice people seem incredibly ignorant about the realities of what they claim to support (e.g. that a child can legally be aborted far past the age where s/he could survive outside the womb, what is involved in abortion at that stage). It seems to be a position that is best upheld through the motto "ignorance is bliss".