Game Design, Laws, and Abortion

I make games. It’s one of my hobbies, and one of my personal joys. As I’ve been learning the process of creating games, I’ve been studying and learning a lot, and much of what I have learned applies to life. 

I was pleased to discover, for example, just how similar the world of game design is to the world of politics, and legislation in particular. To be sure, there are many differences, here is how they are very alike: They’re both about making rules.

Now, let’s look at a situation in game design. Let’s say that there’s a problem in the game. Let’s say that there’s a quirk of the board or a strategic option that gives a player a huge advantage, to the point that they win the game every time. Or maybe there’s another situation that makes the game bog down and nobody progresses. Either way, the game is broken. 

A beginner game designer looks at that and says that it’s no problem, we’ll just make a rule that says you can’t do that strategy. Easy fix. 

The problem is that many times that one new rule you made reveals another problem, so you now have to make another rule to fix the one just created. Maybe this one is an exception to that initial rule. But then this new rule triggers new problems. And now, to fix the next problems, you have to make yet more rules and I bet you can guess where this leads.

A more experienced, more professional game designer would look at the initial problem and think about it. They would analyze the situations that would motivate the player to choose the problematic strategy in the first place. They would ask why it’s so appealing. Why would anyone want to choose it in the first place?

Then, you adjust the board, or you adjust the existing rules to make that a less effective in-game strategy. If that choice no longer helps the player, or if other choices are more effective in the long run of the game, then the problem strategy is minimized, or simply goes away.

I would hope that it’s very clear how this applies to the legislature. All too often, our response to the idea of a problem in our society is simply to make that problem illegal. I’m discovering that a better approach would be to ask ourselves, “Why is this a problem? And why are people choosing to do it?” and then to write legislation that would fix THOSE problems.

Let’s look at the problem of Abortion as a big example of this. 

For the record, I am personally and morally opposed to the concept of abortion of a pregnancy. I think that, ideally, a child should be wanted, loved, and anticipated with excitement in a loving and nurturing family. I also know that this doesn’t always happen.

Politically, it’s very easy for those who are opposed to abortion to just say, “Well, let’s just make it illegal!” 

But let’s apply what I’ve learned in game design. Let’s ask some of the tough questions. What makes someone want to have an abortion? Why does a woman want to end a pregnancy? 

The hard part of this question is that there are thousands of different answers from thousands of different circumstances. From what I hear in the debate, it’s not an easy choice for a woman to make. It can be personally traumatizing, socially stigmatizing, and financially overwhelming, among many other things. And yet, in spite of all of those horrors, it is still seen as being LESS traumatic, LESS stigmatizing, and LESS financially devastating than the prospect of bearing a child for 9 months and then raising them for 18+ years.

So, if I, as an advocate of the life of the child (not necessarily in the “pro-life” political camp, though) want to see fewer abortions, it seems to me that the legislation to push for, to vote for, would be the ideas that make having the baby LESS stigmatizing, LESS devastating, and LESS traumatic. If we make laws and circumstances that support a mother in crisis, then we would have fewer abortions. If ending the life of a child becomes the least effective option, it will be chosen far less.

How do we do that? Well, that’s not easy, but here are a few ideas:

1. Make adoption easier. There are many childless couples and households that would dearly love to have a child. My wife and I were in this situation for many years. We looked into the option of adoption and the costs and challenges were almost insurmountable. If you make it easier and more fair, there will be a lessened need for abortions.

2. Provide more support for struggling moms. If a woman sees bearing and raising a child as an overwhelming road that she has to tread alone for years to come, then abortion is a more appealing option. 

3. Better education. If our teens learn more about what is involved in parenting and raising a child, they will approach that phase in their life with greater respect and confidence. This is more than just sex education and contraception. This is all about understanding family and interpersonal commitments. 

4. Holding men accountable for the babies they help conceive is important and right and just. It’s also a double-edged sword in some ways. If a man is facing a lifetime of personal and financial commitment that he’s not ready for, he might well push for an abortion. This is a part of the complication of the issue that I don’t have a great answer for. Still, if the fathers have options, like adoption, and education, this situation will also be lessened.

I, personally, think that many of these options are good for society as a whole, not just people who find themselves caught in the situation of being expectant and uncertain parents-to-be.

This is a very complicated issue. There are no easy answers. I’ve been thinking about it a lot, and I want to share some of my other musings here in my blog sometime soon. I’d love to hear your (respectful) comments below!

Mark has a lifelong testimony of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (the Mormon Church). Mark also has other sites and blogs, including ATaleOfHeroes.com, MarkHansenMusic.com and his Dutch Oven blog.