When it comes to the equality of the sexes one of the greatest obstacles has been the inequality of childbirth. The burden for bearing children falls entirely on women and the nurturing of said infant has a far greater impact on the bodies, choices, lives, careers of women than of men. So if there was a technology that could relieve women of this burden would you be in favour of it? I imagine that feminists might instinctively respond with a yes. Christians on the other hand might not be so keen for the reason that motherhood should in general be seen as a blessing and not a curse.

If Christians were asked whether they would be in favour of a technology that had the promise and potential to end abortion? I imagine their instinctive response would be ‘yes, of course’ while feminists would likely be wary or negative towards this possibility.

Well, what if that invention was the same in both cases? That’s precisely the dilemma posed by artificial wombs.

A team of Israeli scientists announced the mother of all inventions last week. Researchers from the Weizmann Institute of Science revealed in the journal Nature that they had successfully gestated hundreds of mice inside an artificial womb. They placed newly fertilised eggs inside glass vials rotating in a ventilated incubator, and grew the embryos for 11 days – the mid-point of a mouse pregnancy – outside their mothers’ bodies. The embryos developed normally; their hearts, visible through the glass vials, pounded steadily at 170 beats per minute.

Reproduction without pregnancy: would it really emancipate women?

These developments are being pioneered to improve the outcomes of super-premature babies, couples dealing with multiple miscarriages and avoid the developmental issues that these often cause. But it could also have a major impact on reproductive rights and end the abortion debate. Jenny Kleeman is worried.

What if all foetuses, and even embryos, are potentially viable because they could be gestated inside an artificial womb? Any unborn child could be considered to have a right to life. In countries where abortion is legal, access to it derives from a woman’s right to choose what happens to her body. But if unwanted babies could be “rescued” by technology – gestated inside an artificial womb and then given up for adoption – then abortion could be simultaneously pro-choice and “pro-life”. Why should a mother be able to decide to terminate an unwanted baby if an artificial womb can save its life?

(emphasis added)

What if, indeed.