My aim is to increase the amount of happy future people. Reducing abortion is one way to do that, but I’ve been clear in a few comments that I would endorse other interventions over reducing abortions:
“optimizing for increasing the amount of children that families want and are able to happily have is probably better than voluntary abortion reduction as a means of increasing the amount of near-term future people” (source)
“I think voluntary abortion reduction is just one of many ways to increase the amount of near-term future people. The post’s “In Our Personal Lives” section includes the suggestions you gave and more, which I agree are arguably more effective than voluntary abortion reduction in accomplishing that goal.” (source)
You weren’t able to see this, but I also agree-voted the following comments by others:
“the best solution here is incentivizing people to voluntarily have more children—e.g. child tax credits, maternity/paternity leave, etc” (source)
“I’d be tentatively more comfortable with measures taken to facilitate increasing the number of wanted pregnancies, including legalizing paid surrogacy services and subsidizing childcare and adoption of older children.” (source)
Everything I wrote about prioritizing other causes over voluntary abortion reduction goes double for involuntary abortion reduction, because of personal autonomy concerns. So yes, I endorse applying the same argument here in favor of prioritizing EA intervention without a negative externality regarding personal autonomy. I don’t think there’s an inconsistency here, because I’ve made it clear that I would prioritize “interventions that empower women who want to have more children or reduce barriers that they face.”
My aim is to increase the amount of happy future people. Reducing abortion is one way to do that, but I’ve been clear in a few comments that I would endorse other interventions over reducing abortions:
“optimizing for increasing the amount of children that families want and are able to happily have is probably better than voluntary abortion reduction as a means of increasing the amount of near-term future people” (source)
“I think voluntary abortion reduction is just one of many ways to increase the amount of near-term future people. The post’s “In Our Personal Lives” section includes the suggestions you gave and more, which I agree are arguably more effective than voluntary abortion reduction in accomplishing that goal.” (source)
You weren’t able to see this, but I also agree-voted the following comments by others:
“the best solution here is incentivizing people to voluntarily have more children—e.g. child tax credits, maternity/paternity leave, etc” (source)
“I’d be tentatively more comfortable with measures taken to facilitate increasing the number of wanted pregnancies, including legalizing paid surrogacy services and subsidizing childcare and adoption of older children.” (source)
Everything I wrote about prioritizing other causes over voluntary abortion reduction goes double for involuntary abortion reduction, because of personal autonomy concerns. So yes, I endorse applying the same argument here in favor of prioritizing EA intervention without a negative externality regarding personal autonomy. I don’t think there’s an inconsistency here, because I’ve made it clear that I would prioritize “interventions that empower women who want to have more children or reduce barriers that they face.”