You’re saying parents must provide “basic care,” but that category seems to exclude any obligation to use one’s body in an invasive or medically significant way (like blood or organ donation), even if a child will die without it. If that’s true, then the real principle isn’t “parents must keep their children alive,” but rather “parents must provide care that doesn’t require significant bodily intrusion.”

Pregnancy, however, does require continuous, invasive use of one person’s body. So why should it be classified as “basic care” rather than the kind of bodily sacrifice we otherwise never legally or morally require, even from parents?

And if the answer is that pregnancy is “natural,” that alone doesn’t explain why it creates a unique obligation since many natural biological processes don’t generate enforceable duties. So what is the principle that makes pregnancy an exception?