I wonder how this issue will be addressed if at some point in the future the embryo could be developed in an incubator? If the woman didn't want to be pregnant, the embryo could be removed, incubated, and then the resulting baby could be given to the parents later. In that theoretical environment, what would be allowed? Would it be permitted to destroy the embryo, or would it be required to allow the embryo develop into a baby?
I wonder this because often it seems that the reason a woman has an abortion is more about her ability to provide for the child rather than issues directly related to pregnancy. So if we take the whole "control of her body" issue out of consideration, how would the issue be addressed?
I think the frozen embryos are kind of like the same thing. Although we don't have artificial incubators, we do have women who could be surrogates. If women willfully volunteer to be a human incubators, should we allow the embryos to develop even over the objections of the biological parents?
In a generation or two, live births may be very uncommon. I mean, why go through all the trauma on your body, why worry about c-sections, and all that. I'm speculating of course and I think there would still be benefits from carrying the child naturally, but I could see it becoming common if such problems were overcome. Or I could see men carrying the child in some cases.
Genetic engineering is also coming, and in fact is already here. CRISPR and designer children. Not just choosing the gender, but choosing height, eye and hair color, and even selecting for components of intelligence are already feasible. One day, our children will likely be selected and we will from that point on guide our own biological evolution as a species directly instead of natural selection.
Homo Deus is an interesting book with some of these concepts and more, I highly recommend it: https://www.ynharari.com/book/homo-deus/