Child birth carries risk. But family are well aware of that in first trimester. They know what risk of baby birth is right away. On top of that if risk changes in 3rd trimester then yes mother should be protected. Outside of that we don’t have to agree. I respect your opinion.
There is no discrete point where a developing thing becomes a human entitled to full rights. It's continuous and therefore all arbitrary based on each person's beliefs. Some people think it's wrong to "spill" semen even, while there are others who think it's ok to kill a born child (some cultures have frequently killed female infants in particular). So given the spectrum of diverse belief in USA culture today, where does society decide to draw the line? Gotta have some compromise
I’m well aware that our country doesn’t recognize our most vulnerable population - unborn infants in the law like it should. However, the law does take into affect that when a pregnant woman is murdered, it’s a double homicide. The law at one point and still does recognized an unborn child as a valuable. The only difference I see between homicide and abortion is intent.
But all the same it’s homicide.
Let’s use another analogy. Rape is illegal sex. While legal sex is consensual. Same act, intent makes the difference.
As for birthing a baby months earlier than the due date, now that's a tough ethical question. What if it is so underdeveloped that it will require support for life and not have full faculties or senses? Especially since you are bringing this baby to a family already facing extreme hardship (pregnancy was endangering mom's life after all, maybe she needs treatment for cancer etc)