ABSTRACT The traditional approach to the abortion debate revolves around numerous issues, such as whether the foetus is a person, whether the foetus has rights, and more. Don Marquis suggests that this traditional approach leads to a standoff and that the abortion debate ‘requires a different strategy.’ 1 Hence his ‘future of value’ strategy, which is summarized as follows: • A normal foetus has a future of value. • Depriving a normal foetus of a future of value imposes a misfortune on it. • Imposing a misfortune on a normal foetus is prima facie wrong. • Therefore, depriving a normal foetus of a future of value is prima facie wrong. • Killing a normal foetus deprives it of a future of value. • Therefore, killing a normal foetus is prima facie wrong. In this paper, I argue that Marquis's strategy is not different since it involves the concept of person – a concept deeply rooted in the traditional approach. Specifically, I argue that futures are valuable insofar as they are not only dominated by goods of consciousness, but are experienced by psychologically continuous persons. Moreover, I argue that his strategy is not sound since premise (1) is false. Specifically, I argue that a normal foetus, at least during the first trimester, is not a person. Thus, during that stage of development it is not capable of experiencing its future as a psychologically continuous person and, hence, it does not have a future of value.