In this case, I disagree.  This represents a potential recommitment to bad policy on the grounds that you or your ancestors (who are not you) did it before.  I’d say it’s more similar to a sunk cost fallacy than an acausal negotiation.

That’s why I gave an example of a 16 year old girl having a kid.  This is, clearly and obviously, a bad policy.  

And if you’re reading this, you probably either agree abortion should be legal (in which case you disagree with the logic of the argument), xor you probably agree that mass migration isn’t such a great idea (in which case you disagree with the logic of the argument).