e: I hate to complain about downvotes, but did totally miss your point here or something? I think this is a good conversation to have, and I was replying in good faith.
There is a significant proportion of feminists who are against prostitution and pornography because it exploits women's bodies, and your statement can be used as a potential argument to dislodge their beliefs.
On the other hand, it is more unacceptable to suggest at times a person might not be always fully rational, and even more unacceptable to generalize this to a group of people. So your statement has brought up a contradiction in the beliefs of a subset of people, which you're not supposed to do.
I'm sure that your comment is in good faith, and I'm not one of the ones who downvoted you. I only want to show you that, from this point of view, "informed consent" is not a good enough excuse for how these women are being used. (And I would also question whether these girls are truly "informed" about what's really going to be done to their children.)
> An informed consent can be said to have been given based upon a clear appreciation and understanding of the facts, implications, and future consequences of an action.
Of course, as you say:
> I would also question whether these girls are truly "informed" about what's really going to be done to their children.
This is completely fair, and I agree coercion or enticement may preclude informed consent. I know that this can be a sensitive issue, but I believe in working towards this goal rather than avoiding the issue. For instance: many people donate organs and tissues, but it is (generally speaking, and in the USA) illegal to sell these services. Thanks for the rsponse.