Two questions that need to be addressed

Being a woman that suffered indirectly from abortion (I never had one, but when I found I could not have children naturally, there was only one doctor who specialized in fertility problems in my city and most of them performed abortions or were trying to keep women from getting pregnant, I feel that the onus is on the doctor. I also feel that the law should see if the women really wanted abortions, and go after anyone who forced her to go to the abortion clinic, whether her parents, or boyfriend. If the unborn is in the fallopian tube, then the doctor has to perform an operation to remove the tube and the unborn in it. Since it is early in the pregnancy, the unborn will not survive and if left untreated, the woman will die. So your idea that the pregnancy will continue is silly. What one is talking about is unnecessary abortions not to do with saving the mother and the infant. It would mean that if the unborn is not in the tube, then if the pregnancy would eventually kill the mother, it would continue until the baby could survive = even though it might be a six or seven month pregnancy. It would also mean that more emphasis would be on giving the mother more financial help, donations of clothes, cribs, etc. Getting her a job and letting her know of what is out there. I think the reason that many women have abortions is that some people do not let them know that there is help out there for them.

Well, since elective abortion was illegal in most US states up until Roe V Wade the question is kind of academic. Just allow the states to enforce the law the way they used to. Mostly though it wasn't the women seeking the abortions that were considered law breakers, it was the doctors. It wouldn't take any special enforcement since there are already laws in place to punish doctors who break certain laws. People act like we have to re-invent the wheel for enforcement of abortion bans, but in reality we just have to enforce that law the way all other medical laws are enforced.

Many of the people who want to reverse Roe vs Wade want the issue decided byu the voters in each state not by a judge in some court.

I know that abortion is illegal in Chile and Nicaragua. I think it is illegal in Malta but I guess some ladies pop up to Italy to get an abortion. I think that no abortions should be allowed unless the mother's life is in danger then it should be permitted. I think there could be a law enforcement office which could look into what the ladies are doing. If a lady has an illegal abortion in a back street clinic she could go to jail for 3 years. The abortionist could go to jail for 20 years. I think that doctor doing the abortion should more punishment than the lady. On a documentary I saw that a doctor was doing an abortion for a lady that could afford to pay lots of money. That was filmed in Nicaragua in 2006 when they had an abortion ban. Typically at the moment less than 2% of abortions are because the mother's life is in danger. Sometimes a lady has a miscarriage and would be horrible for her. She might be worried that the law enforcement might suggest she has had an abortion but that would be wrong. If such a lady had a 3 year jail term it would be totally wrong. Instead I would suggest free pregnancy tests are available and abortions available up to 9 weeks pregnancy. The ladies should get money if they adopt and don't abort their unwanted baby. If a lady has her life in danger an abortion should be available for her. This would make many ladies consider adoption and lower the number of abortions considerably.

Banning abortion will never work. In order to stop something that people think is immoral you need to change the morals of the population. Abortion happened in past generations but nothing as on this big a scale, for life was considered precious and girls were raised to "save themselves" for marriage. Being pregnant out of wedlock was shameful--now it is accepted and even celebrated. You cannot expect a ban on abortion to succeed in such a climate. Change society's morals and you won't have to worry about banning abortion. But you absolutely can NOT legislate morality, it just doesn't work. You have to change the people and the behavior will follow.

They both be punish, but I Think a Doctor need to suffer greater punishment. As a medical practitioner their obligation and concerned must be maintaining, restoring and value human life (they oath for that). Many women who had an unwanted pregnancy came to them to search for their rescue and that is to abort the fetus inside. As a doctor they are more knowledgeable compare to their client. They are in a position to help brighten the mind of their client, explaining that what they wanted is dangerous (can place their own life to danger), it is immoral and not allowed to their profession. If there is no abortionist there will be a decrease number of women who will decide to abort their baby and maybe they will decide to continue their pregnancy. And They will be more careful the next time around.

I think that abortions for social or economic reasons should be banned. If the mother's life is in danger then she would be permitted to have an abortion. Another idea would to make abortion allowed up to 9 weeks pregnancy only. Pregnancy tests could be free. I would like to see adoption become lots more popular. In the 1960s my mom's friend adopted a baby girl. Her birth mother had been a teenager. A few years later she adopted a baby boy. His birth mother had been a successful business woman. I say that in todays society these were the sorts of babies that would be aborted. If abortion becomes against the law the ladies that have an abortion illegally shouldn't be punished. However the caught abortionist should go to jail for twenty years. I believe that education for teenagers should include birth control, pictures of babies in each week of pregnancy and stories of the success of adoption. A lady that gives her baby up for adoption could get $1000 a month for however many months she has been pregnant. The money will come from the couple or person that adopts. Sometimes miscarriage can happen so I wouldn't want such a lady upset authorities thought she had an illegal abortion.

Well if it began illegal to have an abortion then I think the doctors who perform the abortions should get in the most trouble. Then the people who have the abortions should get in trouble as well. I would say if it was going to be enforced they should have to serve jail time. The only bad part is that people who want an abortion bad enough will find another means to abort their children possibly with huge health risks but I guess it might lower the abortion rate or it might make the rate go up for people giving up babies to be adopted.

Excellent topic, Gewcew and one that I thought I'd already responded to. Actually I think what would happen would be that things would revert to how they were in the 60's and before. Women would seek out the underground, back alley doctors (quacks) that would perform the abortions often in unsanitary conditions and many whom didn't even know what they were doing. There would be no protection for the mother if things went wrong for she would be afraid of seeking medical care for fear of punishment. As it is, here in the States, the rate of abortion has been going down. I think that is due to more education, birth control being more readily available & affordable to all and also now we have the morning-after pill. I am pro-choice. I, myself, chose to keep my baby even when I found myself pregnant in some adverse times. That was my choice. I would rather see a woman be able to get a clean abortion and stay safe than the alternative if that were to be her choice. It is a very personal choice and one that I think most women agonize over before coming to the decision.