Total Posts:6|Showing Posts:1-6
Jump to topic:

Suppose abortion is illegal - then what?

rockwater
Posts: 273
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/12/2013 12:57:17 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Pro-lifers: Suppose abortion is illegal in the US except in cases of rape, incest, or to save the life of the mother. Then what?

Who would be punished if an abortion occurs and how?
Would pregnant women be punishable for drinking, smoking, or doin other things with no intention if harming their unborn child but that end up harming or killing them?
Would a woman be punishable for goin abroad to seek an abortion? Wha about people helping her?
Would IVF still be legal? What if it involves embryo selection (not all embryos created are placed in the womb, and some are destroyed)? Could embryos be used in stem cell research? What rules would govern currently frozen embryos, and could new beyond be frozen?

How many women would receive illegal abortions compared with the number who receive abortions now?
How many doctors would commit acts of civil disobedience by performing abortions publicly despite the law?
Would there be a class division among poor women seeking dangerous cheap illegal abortions and wealthy women seeking safer expensive illegal abortions? If so, would one kind of abortion provider (or pregnant woman) be more likely to be prosecuted than another?

If a woman cannot afford to raise a child, will she be given free: neonatal care, financial assistance during pregnancy, financial assistance and healthcare after pregnancy, adoption counseling (including, possibly, legal help)?
Will all pregnant women and children receive any of the above for free or for a reduced price?
Will the government make efforts to promote or subsidize adoption?
What will be done to improve the quality of life for children no one wants to adopt?

Would the government make more effort to provide free or affordable birth control to all women? What about to teenagers? What about the morning after pill?

What will be done if fetuses are found during pregnancy to not have a brain (or to be lacking most of a brain) or to have another condition that practically guarantees death after birth (possibly preceded by extreme suffering)?

I am not trying to argue a pro-choice point of view with these questions. I am trying to see what kind of laws would exist in a country where abortion was outlawed with the exceptions listed above. My own views are somewhere between the most extreme pro-life ones and the most extreme pro-choice ones but I am not sure exactly where.
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/12/2013 2:32:40 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/12/2013 12:57:17 PM, rockwater wrote:
Pro-lifers: Suppose abortion is illegal in the US except in cases of rape, incest, or to save the life of the mother. Then what?

Who would be punished if an abortion occurs and how?
The doctor would lose their license to practice. If the mother attempts to self-abort (which some mothers already do despite its legality), than they can be brought up on child abuse charges.

My cousin tried to self abort, and failed. Her baby now has fetal alcohol syndrome. If abortion was illegal, than she could be brought up on charges. Because abortion is legal, she was legally protected. (My dad's side of the family is blue collar, while my mom's side is white collar).

Would pregnant women be punishable for drinking, smoking, or doin other things with no intention if harming their unborn child but that end up harming or killing them?

Yes, as they should.

Would a woman be punishable for goin abroad to seek an abortion? Wha about people helping her?

No. If the abortion occurs in another country, the US does not have jurisdiction.

Would IVF still be legal?
That has nothing to do with abortion.
What if it involves embryo selection (not all embryos created are placed in the womb, and some are destroyed)?
The right to life is a negative right, not a positive right. You are not required to ensure that the embryo lives, you are just restricted from killing it.

Could embryos be used in stem cell research? What rules would govern currently frozen embryos, and could new beyond be frozen?

So long as it does not conflict with the right to life, I would not be opposed to stem cell research. Stem cells can be collected from the umbilical cord.
How many women would receive illegal abortions compared with the number who receive abortions now?

Depends. Because doctors would lose their license to practice, it would deter doctors from illegally aborting children. You don't spend over $100k in college tuition, just to have your license revoked.

Crime depends on 3 factors: Means, motive, and opportunity.

Means would either be via clinical abortions or via self-induced abortions. since clinical abortions are not longer an option, there's only the less appealing self-abortion.

The opportunity to abort depends on one's chance to have an abortion. The motives of abortion, is what ever reason the woman wants to abort.

Using the economic model of supply and demand, we can use social science to find out what the effects of the law would be. The demand for abortions = the motives behind abortion. The supply of abortions = the opportunity x the means to commit abortion. The price would be the penalties of abortion (whether the penalties be social or legal).

In the absence of legal consequences, the only penalties is the social ostracism associated with abortion. Laws against abortion would act as a minimum penalty, similar to a minimum wage. An increase in penalties for having an abortion would result in a decrease in motive and an increase in (means x opportunity). The increase in (means x opportunity) is the result of the black market, because would be no abortion longer regulated.

As a result, the number of people committing abortion decreases, while the frequency in which they abort increases. Seeing as the opportunity to abort depends on the frequency in which one gets pregnant, the increased frequency would likely be the means of abortion, not the opportunity to abort.

How many doctors would commit acts of civil disobedience by performing abortions publicly despite the law?
Not many. There may be a few doctor Kevorkians out there.
Would there be a class division among poor women seeking dangerous cheap illegal abortions and wealthy women seeking safer expensive illegal abortions?
IS there a division in other black markets? I see no such class division when it comes to the drug market, so I would assume there would be no such division in the abortion market.
If so, would one kind of abortion provider (or pregnant woman) be more likely to be prosecuted than another?

I wouldn't think so.

If a woman cannot afford to raise a child, will she be given free: neonatal care, financial assistance during pregnancy, financial assistance and healthcare after pregnancy, adoption counseling (including, possibly, legal help)?
No way to predict that.
Will all pregnant women and children receive any of the above for free or for a reduced price?
Depends on if the government decides to implement such programs, or if a non-profit organization decides to provide such services.
Will the government make efforts to promote or subsidize adoption?
In some states it is illegal to pay for adoption.
What will be done to improve the quality of life for children no one wants to adopt?

A life is better than no life. Again, you are getting ahead of yourself.
Would the government make more effort to provide free or affordable birth control to all women? What about to teenagers? What about the morning after pill?

Ask the government.
What will be done if fetuses are found during pregnancy to not have a brain (or to be lacking most of a brain) or to have another condition that practically guarantees death after birth (possibly preceded by extreme suffering)?

Seeing as they would die anyways, it would be practical to allow doctors to ease the infant's suffering.
I am not trying to argue a pro-choice point of view with these questions. I am trying to see what kind of laws would exist in a country where abortion was outlawed with the exceptions listed above. My own views are somewhere between the most extreme pro-life ones and the most extreme pro-choice ones but I am not sure exactly where.

Hope I helped.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/12/2013 4:17:32 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/12/2013 2:32:40 PM, DanT wrote:
At 7/12/2013 12:57:17 PM, rockwater wrote:
Pro-lifers: Suppose abortion is illegal in the US except in cases of rape, incest, or to save the life of the mother. Then what?

Who would be punished if an abortion occurs and how?
The doctor would lose their license to practice. If the mother attempts to self-abort (which some mothers already do despite its legality), than they can be brought up on child abuse charges.

My cousin tried to self abort, and failed. Her baby now has fetal alcohol syndrome. If abortion was illegal, than she could be brought up on charges. Because abortion is legal, she was legally protected. (My dad's side of the family is blue collar, while my mom's side is white collar).

Wait, wtf? Did she try to abort her baby by drinking it to death?

You realize that most self-induced abortion is illegal, right? Women can and ARE being brought up on charges for it.

http://rhrealitycheck.org...
AlbinoBunny
Posts: 3,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/12/2013 4:35:37 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Let the dangerous abortions begin.
bladerunner060 | bsh1 , 2014! Presidency campaign!

http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org... - Running for president.
http://www.debate.org... - Running as his vice president.

May the best man win!
Chuz-Life
Posts: 1,789
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/7/2014 4:09:07 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/12/2013 12:57:17 PM, rockwater wrote:
Pro-lifers: Suppose abortion is illegal in the US except in cases of rape, incest, or to save the life of the mother. Then what?

A necro worthy thread if ever there was one.

I am anti-abortion & I don't claim to be "pro-life" because I support the death penalty and for other reasons but I would like to respond to some of your questions.

By the way, it's odd that you separate "incest" from rape. To me, they are pretty much the same unless it is between consenting adults and in those cases, I would not support abortion rights for those involved.

I digress.

Who would be punished if an abortion occurs and how?

In most cases, the woman and the abortion provider would be charged. As for "how" - I'm not sure what you mean. My guess is that you are asking what the charges should be.

My answer to that question is based upon a want for consistency in our laws. Right now (today) we have laws which make it a crime of MURDER for someone to kills a "child in the womb" during the commission of a criminal act. That includes someone who even accidentally shoots a pregnant woman and kills her prenatal child during a bank robbery - for example.

So, since a person can be charged with MURDER for killing a child in the womb even accidentally - in a criminal act. . . why then shouldn't a person who kills one intentionally (in a criminal act) be charged with the same?

Would pregnant women be punishable for drinking, smoking, or doin other things with no intention if harming their unborn child but that end up harming or killing them?

Assuming there is enough evidence to prosecute the case? Yes.

Would a woman be punishable for goin abroad to seek an abortion? Wha about people helping her?

I wouldn't rule it out.

Would IVF still be legal?

It would have to be reformed but I do think it could remain legal following the reforms needed to insure than all the lives created are legally protected.

What if it involves embryo selection (not all embryos created are placed in the womb, and some are destroyed)?

That practice would be criminalized.

Could embryos be used in stem cell research?

Not if it results in the death of or harm to the child involved.

What rules would govern currently frozen embryos, and could new beyond be frozen?

In my opinion, those (frozen) lives should be made wards of the State (government) and they should be made available for adoption by parents who can not conceive children of their own.

How many women would receive illegal abortions compared with the number who receive abortions now?

There is no way to know the answer to that for certain. Hopefully education efforts and other alternatives to abortion can be advanced to keep those numbers down as low as possible.

How many doctors would commit acts of civil disobedience by performing abortions publicly despite the law?

See above.

Would there be a class division among poor women seeking dangerous cheap illegal abortions and wealthy women seeking safer expensive illegal abortions?

As not all abortions cost the same nor reach the same standards of care, that division already exists.

If so, would one kind of abortion provider (or pregnant woman) be more likely to be prosecuted than another?


That would depend on the competence of the law enforcement in that region.

If a woman cannot afford to raise a child, will she be given free: neonatal care, financial assistance during pregnancy, financial assistance and healthcare after pregnancy, adoption counseling (including, possibly, legal help)?

There no such thing as "free" when it comes to those things.

Will all pregnant women and children receive any of the above for free or for a reduced price?

See above.

Will the government make efforts to promote or subsidize adoption?

I certainly hope so.

What will be done to improve the quality of life for children no one wants to adopt?


I would support financial incentives for those willing and able to provide the necessary care for children in those circumstances.

Would the government make more effort to provide free or affordable birth control to all women?

Again, there is no such thing as "free" anything from the government. The only money the government has to "give" comes from someone else that was forced to give it up.

What about to teenagers?

What about them?

What about the morning after pill?

As long as it can not be used to cause an abortion? No problem. Preventing conception is a good thing.

What will be done if fetuses are found during pregnancy to not have a brain (or to be lacking most of a brain) or to have another condition that practically guarantees death after birth (possibly preceded by extreme suffering)?

What about them? Why do you feel there is a need to kill a child that is so certain to die naturally?

I am not trying to argue a pro-choice point of view with these questions. I am trying to see what kind of laws would exist in a country where abortion was outlawed with the exceptions listed above.

You've asked many fair and well thought out questions.

My own views are somewhere between the most extreme pro-life ones and the most extreme pro-choice ones but I am not sure exactly where.

I hope I helped you with that some. :)
"Sooner or later, the Supreme Court of the Unites States is going to have explain how a 'child in the womb' is a person enough to be recognized as a MURDER victim under our fetal homicide laws but how they are not persons enough to qualify for any other Constitutional protections" ~ Chuz Life

http://www.debate.org...
chaedd
Posts: 37
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/10/2014 10:21:00 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
The abortions will still happen. There will not be a signifigant reduction.
Back in the day most abortions were done in an abortion clinic. I suppose the clinics would be closed if the doctors who worked there were sent to jail for an illegal activity.
Since then the abortion pill is available. Maybe they could make this drug illegal, but it has been proved that you can't eliminate an illegal drug, so pregnant women will just figure out how to get an abortion pill and take it.