The author points out that forcing an unwilling mother to have a child is like forcing the kidnapped person to stay connected to the violinist for as long as he needs it. This scenario immediately strikes us as unfair, why should any-one be unwillingly obliged to spend nine years on a bed so that some-one else can live. The point is that even though the violinist has the right to live, he does not have the right to make use of your kidneys when you have not willingly agreed to it. A similar argument can be drawn up in the case of the mother and the fetus. The fetus has a right to live but does he have any rights from the mother that she is unwilling to give. This argument is specially powerful in the case of a rape pregnancy or even in the case of a pregnancy that is unwanted and has happened despite appropriate precautions.
An important crux of the argument given by the author is that even if the demands are small and it would be almost indecent and despicable to refuse that still does not imply a right over the mother if she is not willing to take on the responsibility. Although the Good Samaritan principle might be used by anti-abortionists the author points out that it is only in this particular scenario that we are forcing a human being to act as a Good Samaritan and not leaving it to their