I'm not sure if we can keep this particular topic going, but here goes. I think it's quite a valid point to raise, whether or not concience has to do with whether or not something should be allowed to be terminated. We do not kill the living simply because they are not able to, given their present state (sleep for example) sense what's happening around them. IMO laying the strawman claim in this case is a cheap way to debase the arguement rather than confront it and trying to counter what had been put forth. Just because it argues your points doesn't make it a fallacy.
As for what Silentscope had said, for a woman to go through her pregnancy and decide at the last minute to have an abortion or something is more than a little rich. I don't think that's even possible, but if the pregnancy is unwanted (rape for example) then I think there are legitimate grounds for termination. On the other hand an unplanned pregnancy caused through negligence a woman should have the baby, and give them up for adoption rather than abortion. That's not to say they can't but if it's their own fault...but that's getting off topic.
How about stem cells, ect from death row convicts or something, harvesting what's needed from criminals put to death if that's possible?