After the rights of an unborn child are recognized, what then?
I invite everyone to think of all that would result from such a decision and, hopefully, some will offer answers to any questions.
Will we issue conception certificates rather than birth certificates?
The rights of an unborn child discussions that I've seen seem tied mostly to that most thorny of issues: when DOES life begin? With increasing numbers of states passing more laws to expand manslaughter, wrongful death and even murder charges to the fetus, it is obvious that there is a true contradiction under the law (accepting Roe V. Wade as established law for arguments sake).
The legalities of any attempt at something so ludicrous as a "conception certificate" are innumerable. Yet absurd as it sounds, for those striving to recognize, honor and protect life from its inception the
concept is not at all unreasonable.
Those striving to recognize, honor and protect are not necessarily those who are pro-life, but may also be some who are pro-abortion. For example, a police officer, a prosecutor, a judge, and jury members may be in that category, yet find themselves under certain circumstances in a position to make criminal verdict decisions based on the death of an unborn (or, the vernacular I prefer, PRE-born.) The quandary of is this driver guilty of one count of manslaughter because a woman died, or two counts because the unborn baby also died...
Our society has a huge rift on this point - when does life actually begin - and there is no answer that will satisfy all. There is absolutely nothing that is black and white, but without a consensus it is difficult to establish a societal standard.
Where do children go now and what is the maximum capacity of the currently available facilities?
I'm assuming you mean, as in where do the newborns go whose parents don't want them? If so, then they go to adoption. Demand is so high for adoption of newborns that there is typically only the smallest delays on the part of the infant. For adoptive parents, a wait up to two years is not unusual at all.
If abortion were abolished or at least severely restricted, there would be little chance that we would see a 1.2 million spike in live births, and also see one million (-/+) increase in demand for adoptive homes. We would most likely see a mix of results.
Just for illustrative purposes, there might be 200,000 new babies available per year for adoption. Another 500,000 would be kept by their birth parent(s), or extended family as the case may be. Another 200,000 might never be conceived in the first place, without the availability of abortion as a form of "family planning." And in all likelihood, the remainder would be aborted regardless of law or consequences. Obviously, these numbers are totally off the top of my head, and could be widely variable. But I'd be surprised if the proportions were significantly different
What is the operational cost of those facilities now and how much can we expect their costs to rise after?
Resources currently spent in life termination could be utilized to facilitate adoption agencies, temporary interim foster care, etc. There would undoubtedly be requirements and costs involved, but as palerider pointed out, there are models that we can go to to extrapolate data from that would provide working albeit hypothetical models for a modern U.S. system.
Currently there is a mix of for-profit and non-profit adoption agencies. There is nothing wrong with someone making a living facilitating adoptions, and nothing inherently altruistic about those that don't. The idea would be to gather data on the best of the best, see what works, and get their ideas and input as to costs, liabilities, perceived difficulties, demand, etc. Develop a network of resources and give it the tools and support to grow. The idea would be to not create one problem to solve another, and to try to anticipate anything that would prevent that from happening.
Women who would have otherwise had abortions will now have to carry the baby to term and give birth... What kind of financial obligation will this create for both the parents and, if they can't pay, the taxpayers?
This is most likely a phantom issue. Yes, there will be a number of women who will become, or remain, a burden on society. Again, this is not necessarily a purely economic issue, but also one of options and expectations. Then again, one of those women now keeping a baby may find that child grow up to be the discoverer of the ultimate renewable energy source that will replace oil, coal, nuclear - everything we currently use. What could be the possible asset gains from these children? These are unknowable things.
Just think about all of those teenagers who might be a month late on their menstrual cycles that will now have to get a pregnancy test and then file for a 'conception certificate' too. OH, HELL NO...what a cluster 'F'd UP' mess that will create!!! INVASION OF PRIVACY...that would fly like a 'lead balloon'! Virginity Police...asking all young females to report to your local doctors office for that all important 'VIRGIN CHECK UP'...OMG...what a mess!!!
