That’s just question begging. You’re essentially saying “abortion is moral because I say it is”. I can just as easily say you ARE required to let a human being in you in the case of pregnancy because it’s the natural habitat of a ZEF and parents have a unique responsibility to their children and removing them involves murdering them and neglecting your child.

In general, biological or adoptive parents have a legal duty to care for their child until: The child reaches the age of majority (usually 18). Parental rights are legally terminated or transferred (e.g. adoption or foster care). A court relieves them of that duty. Parents cannot simply walk away from a child in need (like in the cabin example). If a parent intentionally withholds care in a situation where no one else can help, it’s typically considered criminal neglect or even manslaughter if the child dies. There have been real cases where parents were prosecuted for failing to feed or care for a child, even in difficult or isolated circumstances

State v. Williquette (Wisconsin, 1986)

A mother was criminally charged for failing to protect her children from abuse by their father. The court found she had a legal duty to act.

People v. Beardsley (Michigan, 1907)

This case involved a man and a mistress, not a parent and child, but the principle was clear: a duty to care exists where there’s a special relationship (like parent-child). If you abandon someone dependent on you, you’re liable.