Evictionism is a moral theory advanced by Walter Block and Roy Whitehead on a proposed libertarian view of abortion based on property rights. This theory is built upon the earlier work of philosopher Murray Rothbard[1] who wrote that "no being has a right to live, unbidden, as a parasite within or upon some person's body" and that therefore the woman is entitled to eject the baby from her body at any time.[2] Evictionists view a woman's womb as her property and an unwanted fetus as a "trespasser or parasite", even while lacking the will to act. They argue that a pregnant woman has the right to evict a fetus from her body since she has no obligation to care for a trespasser. The authors' hope is that bystanders will "homestead" the right to care for evicted babies and reduce the number of human deaths. They argue that life begins at conception and state that the act of abortion must be conceptually separated into the acts of:
Building on the libertarian stand against trespass and murder, Block supports a right to the first act (eviction), but not the second act (murder).
Walter Block believes the woman always has a right to evict:
if done in the gentlest manner possible regardless of the death of the fetus,[3] and
the woman has publicly announced her abandonment of the right to custody of the fetus.[4][5]
Embryonic research
Likewise, Block proposes that medical experimenters can treat the embryos they have in their possession as laboratory "animals", as is their desire, contingent on only one stipulation: that no one else wishes to raise these very young infants on their own. If there are adoptive parents who wish to homestead the right to care for the children, their rights trump those of the creators of the fertilized egg since the former wishes to protect the child from harm, while the latter does not. Thus, Block offers an alternative to the standard choice between the anti-abortion and pro-choice positions on stem cell research.[6]
Advances in technology
Evictionists believe that advances in technology will continue to improve the medical ability to preserve a living fetus after removal from its mother. This future technology is hoped to save the lives of evicted fetuses at increasingly younger ages whereas aborted fetuses would continue to die at any age.[5]
During the past several decades, neonatal care has improved with advances in medical science, and therefore the limit of viability has moved earlier.[7] The lower limit of viability is approximately five months' gestational age, and usually later.[8]
^"Literature of liberty," Cato Institute, v. 4, p. 12, 1981.
^Rothbard, Murray (1985). "Personal Liberty". For a New Liberty. Fox & Wilkes. pp. 131–132. ISBN0-930073-02-9.
^Block, Walter (2011). "Response to Wisniewski on Abortion, Round Two"(PDF). Libertarian Papers. 3 (4). Retrieved 15 September 2020. In libertarian law, the property owner is entitled to remove the trespasser in the gentlest manner possible; if this necessitates the death of the trespasser, the owner of the land is still justified in upholding the entailed property rights. My conclusion, then, is that the mother is within her rights to evict, but not kill, the fetus.
^Block, Walter (2011). "Response to Wisniewski on Abortion, Round Two"(PDF). Libertarian Papers. 3 (4). Retrieved 5 July 2020. The 'gentlest manner possible' in this case requires that the mother notify the authorities to see if they will take over responsibilities for keeping alive this very young human being.
^Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973) ("viability is usually placed at about seven months (28 weeks) but may occur earlier, even at 24 weeks.") Retrieved 2007-03-04.
^Halamek, Louis. "Prenatal Consultation at the Limits of ViabilityArchived 2009-06-08 at the Wayback Machine", NeoReviews, Vol.4 No.6 (2003): "most neonatologists would agree that survival of infants younger than approximately 22 to 23 weeks' estimated gestational age [i.e. 20 to 21 weeks' estimated fertilization age] is universally dismal and that resuscitative efforts should not be undertaken when a neonate is born at this point in pregnancy."
^Wisniewski, Jakub (2010). "A Critique of Block on Abortion and Child Abandonment"(PDF). Libertarian Papers. 2 (16). Retrieved 5 July 2020. The libertarian principle of the non-initiation of force trumps the right to evict trespassers from our property if it is us who are responsible for making someone a 'trespasser' in the first place.
^Parr, Sean (2011). "Departurism and the Libertarian Axiom of Gentleness"(PDF). Libertarian Papers. 3 (34). Retrieved 5 July 2020. Where evictionism holds that it is justifiable for the mother to lethally evict [the] fetus from her property (that is, to abort it), departurism—on the grounds of the axiom of gentleness—holds that it is not.
^Parr, Sean (2013). "Departurism Redeemed"(PDF). Journal of Peace, Prosperity & Freedom. 2: 109–123. Retrieved 4 July 2020.
