The one divorce I can think of in my extended family came from the onset of heart problems. Properly speaking, it was the abortion she had that caused the divorce, not the fact that she would have died otherwise.
https://www.forbes.com/advisor/legal/divorce/divorce-statist...
However, my judgment was insufficient and I didn't properly recognize that sustaining the marriage was harming our kids.
In an earlier time, the harm would have been much less. Kids (my generation & earlier) once had direct, relationship-level access to a number of caring, invested adults - related and not.
My kids had the two of us 24/7 and that's about it. My wife and I had 10x the parenting demands (time) put upon us that my parents, grandparents-> adults through human history had.
we could short circuit these association choices if the hosts could become unburdened while the fetus is able to live
It’s pretty clear that it will be the state who assumes receivership of the fetus and subsequent human with full constitutional rights.
It’s also a pretty easy legislative problem to say the state is transferring unwanted fetuses, despite the technology for its viability not currently existing. The outcome shifts the burden of guilt - or lack thereof - away from the parent(s), over to an immune state regardless of that state’s laws on abortion. And it shifts priorities and funding measures on creating the technology to ensure a fetus’ viability, whether that turns out to be a fool's errand or not.
This will easily bridge consensus between “camps” as the discomfort over citizens killing fetus turns into a market choice instead of a legislative debate. What will the market primarily choose to end a pregnancy
But this is a stopgap until they can be grown as readymade adults, skipping the tedious and problematic child stage altogether.