Dear Editor,

As we see with the abortion debate over the years, it has been characterised by pro-life (such as churches and social conservatives) and pro-choice (such as feminist groups, and politicians like Juliet Cuthbert-Flynn) factions going back and forth at each other repeatedly and allowing the matter to disappear after a few days with nothing solved. However, I wish to move away from this cycle and have a solution to all of this.

First of all, abortion should be legalised. However, it shouldn’t be State-funded; that would end up making even pro-life taxpayers pay for a process they tried to stop.

What the pro-choice group should do is utilise our newly made Jamaica Social Stock Exchange to create a fund to make pro-choice individuals, companies, and organisations donate to fund the abortion process.

Meanwhile, for viable foetuses that can live outside of the woman, the doctor, with the woman’s consent, can end the pregnancy without killing the baby, simply putting it into an incubator and sending it to the hospital to be cared for until it becomes a mature baby. Then the pro-life groups would have to make a fund on the Jamaica Social Stock Exchange to fund the process of caring for those foetuses until they develop into a baby and are then put up for adoption (because they shouldn’t force pro-choicers to fund it either) — and they are expected to adopt at least some of them. Should they object to it for no real reason, then we will see their hypocrisy.

But my solution may not even be reviewed by either side, or even opposed by either side, because it seems like they are more interested in trying to destroy each other, instead of trying to meet at a middle ground to come to a reasonable consensus, once and for all, which will just leave abortion unsolved. If they cannot meet at an halfway point over the bargaining table, why should they try with legislation?

Marcus White

whitemarc918@gmail.com