Abstract：
Hendricks\' pregnancy rescue case (PRC) tries to show that abortion is typically morally wrong. I argue here that there are at least two morally relevant differences between the abortion in PRC and the typical abortion so that the latter isn\'t morally wrong even if the former is morally wrong. I develop five modifications to PRC to show that these two differences are morally important. First, in PRC we don\'t know whether the person gives informed consent to the abortion, nor does the medical professional who will perform the abortion, and so the abortion can\'t be performed because the patient gives informed consent to it. Second, not preventing the death of the fetus in PRC brings about the death of an additional fetus gestating in a separate pregnant person, whereas most abortions don\'t entail the termination of another\'s pregnancy.
摘要：
亨德里克斯怀孕救援案（PRC）试图表明堕胎在道德上通常是错误的。我在这里认为，中国的堕胎与典型的堕胎之间至少存在两个道德上相关的差异，因此即使前者在道德上是错误的，后者在道德上也不是错误的。我对PRC进行了五项修改，以表明这两个差异在道德上很重要。首先,在中国，我们不知道该人是否知情同意堕胎，进行堕胎的医疗专业人员也没有，因此不能进行堕胎，因为患者给予了知情同意。第二,在中国不阻止胎儿死亡会导致另一个怀孕的胎儿死亡，而大多数堕胎并不意味着终止另一个人的妊娠。
