Abortion can be demonstrated as immoral using Beauchamp's Principles

Thank you for the response. Beneficence can be included at your leisure if you feel it adds to your argument. I did not include it in this thread because claiming that giving birth is Beneficient would spur a discussion on natalism that I don't want to have, a subject more suited to a debate on conception (bringing a living human being into existence) than abortion (destroying an extant living human being). I will address the points in the same order as they have been in the previous posts. 1) Non-maleficence The question here is actually at what point SHOULD an unborn child acquire the same rights as the mother. Responding with a statement of current legal standing is the naturalistic fallacy: That the way something "is" is thus how it "should be". Historically many actions that were legal (slavery, segregation) have rightly been abolished because they are, and have always been, unethical. Now to the ethics of the point: when evaluating maleficence it is imperative to assess all the impacts of both choices. What you say could be true depending on the situation: Carrying a child to term could impact health (mental, vital, et al.), career, finance, and family. However, the consequence of the other choice, Abortion, is always the end of a human life. As I stated in my first post, if the woman's life is in danger then both choices would lead to the end of a human life and are morally equivalent and it should be put at the disgression of the woman which to choose in that situation. On the other hand, if carrying to term threatens something less important/valuable than human life then abortion should be illegal. Consider the following scenario that deals with killing and "career prospects": Scenario: You and a coworker are both up for a significant promotion and it looks like your coworker will get it. Before the decision is made an opportunity arises where you could subtly kill your coworker in such a way that you would never be caught and suffer no ill effects. What do you do? Clearly, the wrong thing to do is to murder your coworker. To do so would constitute a serious harm, the deprivation of Life and a Future. An unborn child possesses both these things and killing this child therefore constitutes the same harm. 2) Autonomy I certainly do not advocate the removal of a woman's human right to self determination. This would in fact be unacceptable. However, I do note that many actions are illegal; and that no person's self determination includes the performance of these actions. By forbidding a person to steal, to enslave another, or to murder, we are not removing self determination, we are actually protecting it for those who would have been stolen from, enslaved, or murdered. These are all actions that deprive autonomy and therefore are justifiably banned by civil societies. Abortion deprives autonomy to the same degree that murder does. Although the fetus is not exercising autonomy at the moment of abortion, there is still a lifetime of autonomy that is lost in that act that was nonetheless the fetus' autonomy. 3) Justice The main component of Justice is that there are no "primary" vs. secondary patients. All human beings, not just autonomy-exercising or adult ones, deserve the same respect and protection by the law. In this way the U.K.'s arbitrary 24 week distinction is a perfect example of an unjust law. That a fetus who is 23 weeks after conception, who is in every way indistinguishable from a fetus at 24 weeks, is somehow not even a person though its counterpart enjoys all the benefits of government protection is unjust to an absurd extent. For the relationship between fetus and mother, Justice dictates that the interests and future autonomy of the child be given equal weight as interests and future autonomy of the mother, particularly in the eyes of the law. I'd like to emphasize what you said that "all women" should be treated fairly and equally, and though unsaid they should be treated fairly and equally to all men as well. We concur on this point completely. However, Legal abortion is a serious impediment to this ideal, since it is clear that some men and women being killed before they are born is neither fair nor equitable. I would disagree that allowing the choice of abortion is the "only possible" way to create a fair and equal society. Rather it is an impossible way to do so. Thank you for your time. I look forward to your response.