Jen R
Under the heading about "forcing doctors to wait until the last minute", you say:

"I trust doctors to monitor their health and judge when there is a legitimate risk to the woman’s life that requires action" and "it seems perfectly reasonable that you can’t kill another person unless you have a certain level of confidence that a grave harm is going to happen and there is no other non-violent option."

The problem is, people need to be able to know whether what they're about to do is breaking the law or not, especially with how charged this subject is and how high the penalties are. There's no way to know what law enforcement and juries will consider "legitimate risk" and "certain level of confidence." There's no way to know whether some prosecutor will decide to charge a doctor who didn't, in their opinion, wait long enough to make a decision. Medical necessity is a defense under these laws, not a shield from prosecution.
Hide Replies 1
Avatar Placeholder
Unverified comment
By that reasoning, the law has no meaning. In theory a malicious prosecutor could charge anyone with any crime irrespective of what the law says, and they could be convicted by a hostile jury. "Shield from prosecution" generally isn't a thing. But in real life, doctors that fail to fulfil the duty of care to their patients because of pro-abortion disinformation about the law should be sued for medical malpractice and lose their licences. And all pregnant women, especially those that live in pro-life states, must find a pro-life obstetrician. Clearly doctors that support abortion aren't going to keep them safe.