Not surprisingly, we broke up. And my desire for fatherhood was eventually fulfilled by two wonderful children. But every so often I think back to the fateful decision, and frustration boils up. I am particularly reminded of it now, as I counsel a friend who finds himself in a parallel -- but reverse -- situation: when he broke off his engagement, his girlfriend told him that she was pregnant and was going to have the child no matter what.

That is her right, of course, and nobody should be able to take that away. But when men and women engage in sexual relations both parties recognize the potential for creating life. If both parties willingly participate then shouldn't both have a say in whether to keep a baby that results?

The abortion debate has polarized into a shouting match about two fundamentally different conceptions of conception, as it were. The anti-abortion position asserts that at the moment sperm meets egg a new human has been created, endowed with its own rights. Much of the recent strategy of anti-abortion advocates has been to attempt an end run around Roe v. Wade by establishing legal personhood in subtle ways through administrative fiat. For example, the Bush administration decided to include fetuses under the Children's Health Insurance Program, a tricky maneuver that creates a paradox for liberals who wish to expand the health coverage of pregnant women, but who loathe the idea of establishing legal claims on behalf of fetuses.

Other such tactics include the attempted appointment of a state guardian for the fetus of a severely retarded woman by Gov. Jeb Bush of Florida. In the face of such strategies, the pro-choice movement has desperately clung to the notion that the fetus is part of the mother and not a separate person. Pro-choice advocates argue that the debate is really about a woman's control over her body. Hence my lack of rights to have any say in whether my seed comes to fruition.

Of course, most Americans seem to fall somewhere between these two positions. They support abortion rights, but they are also willing to accept restrictions on those rights. They do not think a fetus is the same as a person, but neither do they think of it as part and parcel of a woman's body like her appendix, a kidney or a tumor. They see a fetus as an individual under construction. Hence the almost universal support for abortion in the case of risk to the mother -- why not opt for protecting life that is already here on earth over something that is still, ultimately, potential?