It's outright obscene for a government that does as badly as ours in caring for children to even consider encouraging women to continue pregnancies. Benign neglect would be a less evil alternative. And, while encouraging women to have abortions is beyond the pale, we need to acknowledge that choosing abortion could be the most moral decision a woman can make....
Every pregnancy has possibilities but there are also realities. More often than not, potential parents who are seriously ill-equipped for parenthood can't or don't do a good job. They may decide to become parents anyway, and that is their decision to make, not ours. But it is not our place to encourage them, either. They need the cold hard facts about all options including how tough raising kids is and how little help they will get if they do choose to become parents. If we care about women and children, our policy proposals will be focused on what's best for them and not on what makes us look good or achieves a cease-fire in the abortion wars.
-- Frances Kissling, "Sometimes Abortion Is The Better Choice"
A majority supports legalized abortion, but many are wary to admit that abortion is the "better" choice in some situations. This is in part a result of the one-sided promotion of childbirth, even for those in a myriad of situations where they might not be able to handle it, in our country and culture. Some, like Justice Stevens, only support this just so far:
If a woman has a constitutional right to place a higher value on avoiding either serious harm to her own health or perhaps an abnormal childbirth [*] than on protecting potential life, the exercise of that right cannot provide the basis for the denial of a benefit to which she would otherwise be entitled.
Thus, state sponsored medical care can selectively fund "normal childbirth" (though even there, a woman's health is negatively affected in many ways, ways that would not exist if she had an early abortion), but not avoid paying for an abortion when having one is necessary for her health and well being. This was the dissenting view in that case though some states have a more liberal construction. IOW, even by this compromise view, the state can selectively encourage childbirth in any number of cases, even though for the girl or woman having a child would be problematic. Protecting the destruction of embryos trumps that. Justice Brennan had a stricter rule:
The proposition for which these cases stand thus is not that the State is under an affirmative obligation to ensure access to abortions for all who may desire them; it is that the State must refrain from wielding its enormous power and influence in a manner that might burden the pregnant woman's freedom to choose whether to have an abortion.
The moral choice including the forces in the real world that lead one to (reasonably) feel compelled to have one is recognized by many. For instance, the Presbyterian Church noting that it believes the choice should be left to the girl/woman even in cases where the Church might feel it immoral has said:
The considered decision of a woman to terminate a pregnancy can be a morally acceptable, though certainly not the only or required, decision. Possible justifying circumstances would include medical indications of severe physical or mental deformity, conception as a result of rape or incest, or conditions under which the physical or mental health of either woman or child would be gravely threatened. ...
The Christian community must be concerned about and address the circumstances that bring a woman to consider abortion as the best available option. Poverty, unjust societal realities, sexism, racism, and inadequate supportive relationships may render a woman virtually powerless to choose freely.
We can declare an act should not be illegal for simply pragmatic grounds, illegality will only make things worse. OTOH, we can also make something legal because it is protects something inherently good. This includes making the moral choice, right or wrong, on the basis of one's own conscience. Also, the belief that in some cases that it is better to have an abortion, all things being equal. The government should be neutral in such cases, though it would not be "beyond the pale" for anyone to encourage abortion in all cases, particularly when they are counseled about all the choices and facts.
After all, many think it is the best path in certain cases.
---
* Justice Stevens does not address what exactly "abnormal childbirth" covers, and since "health" includes mental health, there is an unclear overlap. For instance, where does rape fit it? Or, as is generally the case for late term abortions not related to some medical condition, some severe deformity?