"Unwinding" vs. Abortion

Idk if this really belongs under abortion but since it's linked to it I'm gonna post it here.

I'm reading a book called Unwind, and while it's a teen fiction book the topic hit me pretty hard. This is set in the future, years after the Heartland war (pro-choice vs pro-life) and a new bill was created to appease both side. The Bill of Life states that "human life may not be touched from the moment of conception until a child reaches the age of thirteen."

Abortion is illegal, but the option given is to "unwind" your child, if he/she is old enough ( 13-18 ). This means basically killing the person and reusing body parts- an unwilling organ donor, in short.

Is this better than abortion, because the child is still given a life and becomes useful after death? Or is it still "abortion" in a sense?

I believe it's the latter, as well as inhumane, mainly because the teen years are the ones where kids fight and disagree with thair parents often. So if this bill was to be created the parents could just ship their kid off to be killed and recycled if they didn't want to deal with their son/daughter. How sickening.

Also since abortions are illegal many mothers leave their babies on front porches, and it's illegal for the family living in the house to not take the baby in and raise it. Better than dumping the baby in a dumpster, but who's to say that if the parents don't want the child the family they choose has to take it?


Personally I'm not looking for a debate about this, because I don't know what I would do in the situation of being pregnant and not wanting the child... But I do want to hear opinions.

Oh jeez. I would think (hope) that parents would be attached enough to their kids by 13 that they would not ship them off to a spare parts joint, however bratty and awful they might be as teens (I know I was a pretty irritating adolescent, but I don't think my parents would have chosen this option, perhaps it would have been different if they felt like they had been saddled with me for 13 years and were just waiting for the moment they could get rid of me). Also, by the time the kid is 13, parents are only legally obligated for 5 more years. They'd have to be completely hard-hearted and lacking in any kind of human decency and emotion to ship their kid off rather than waiting it out or just kicking them out of the house. In the case of abortion, no relationship has been formed with the unborn child, no bond, or sense of obligation or understanding of the fetus as a human being. I'm not sure it's plausible for that to still be the case after 13 years.

If it was routine to leave an unwanted kid on a random doorstep and a kid showed up that I didn't want....I'd put him on the neighbor's doorstep instead all sneaky-like Why is illegal for the receiver of the kid to not take the child, but not illegal for the parent to not keep the child?

*edit: spelling!

As far as I know it is illegal to abandon a child in that way. It comes under child neglect and child endangerment stuff because you're endangering the child's life by leaving it on its own. In some places there are areas where it's acceptable to leave a baby like a hospital or someplace but in most cases it is illegal. Whoever finds the child then carries the legal obligation of not endangering the child's life further.

Yeah, I know about that stuff. But in the book it's legal, and it's the book I'm really referring to... either way I'm not really on that subject, it was more of a side note.