EVICTIONISM AND PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS

Abstract

Evictionism is a compromise position between the pro-life and pro-choice positions on abortion. The former prohibits killing or removing the fetus from the womb apart from the mother’s health considerations at any time during the pregnancy; the latter allows for both. Evictionism splits this particular “baby in half” by legally permitting the ejection of the pre-born baby at the mother’s discretion, but not killing this very young person. Given present medical technology, the fetus is viable in the third trimester, very rarely before that. Thus, evictionism resembles to the pro-life result at this stage of development of the fetus, in that the mother has the reject to eject or evict the fetus from her body, and the latter is viable outside of the womb. However, in the first two trimesters, the results of evictionism and the pro-choice position overlap: when evicted, the fetus will not survive. However, as medical technology improves, and the pre-born baby is viable outside of the womb earlier and earlier, evictionism will more and more come to resemble the pro-life position. However, evictionism will always, at any level of technology, remain separate from these two other more extremist positions. Evictionism is thus the moderate position between these two extreme perspectives. Block in a series of publications supports evictionism; Wisniewski rejects this theory. Grisillo castigates both for elements of their debate concerning improvement and the use of analogies. The present paper is a critique of this latter paper.