There is a difference between a conceived person and an unconceived one.
We assume an unborn person would prefer to be born than killed. An unconceived person doesn't exist at all, so there is no moral/ethical issue in not conceiving them.
The exception maybe is biology, but there is still an upper limit to personal resources which one wouldn't want to exhaust due to the impact on their other (if any) children 's quality of life.
> We assume an unborn person would prefer to be born than killed.
A clump of cells doesn't have enough coherence to have a preference. In fact, babies don't have the kind of brain development necessary to comprehend this question, let alone form a preference until years after being born.
Of course, but obviously when left to nature, that newly created clump of cells, which is a new person in a primitive state, will eventually gain cognition and develop preferences.
Your argument seems to suggest that a comatose person would have the same entitlement to life and an unborn person.
We assume an unborn person would prefer to be born than killed. An unconceived person doesn't exist at all, so there is no moral/ethical issue in not conceiving them.
The exception maybe is biology, but there is still an upper limit to personal resources which one wouldn't want to exhaust due to the impact on their other (if any) children 's quality of life.