My argument will proceed in three stages. Part I explains and defends Donagan’s critique of Judith Jarvis Thomson’s famous ‘violinist argument’ for abortion rights. Part II looks at an implication of Donagan’s critique: when pregnancy threatens the mother’s life or originates in rape, abortion is justified as a form of self-defence. I defend this implication against three objections. (i) The innocence of the fetus (ii) the passivity of the fetus (iii) the problem of proportionality. In part III, I argue that Donagan’s approach has advantages over rival approaches to these questions such as the “lesser evils” approach  suggested by Beckwith and appeals to the doctrine of double effect.