Criminalization or abortion!?!?

[yesdachi]

Lets imagine that in the future that the Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade. Now individual states can make abortion a criminal offence, basically pre-meditated murder. What should the punishment for a woman who gets an abortion be? Should the doctor also be charged?

Should it be legal for a pregnant woman to go to another state or country where abortion is legal and have it done then come back to her state without a criminal investigation?

Lets try not to argue if abortion is right or wrong, we’ve been there and done that. This question is a very real one that the US may face if Roe v. Wade is ever overturned. It seems that a lot of people don’t want abortion to be legal but they also don’t want to punish a woman for having one. It can’t be both ways.

[Louis de la Ferte Ste Colombe]

Why would anyone be charged?

Person looking for abortion will just "go on vacation" in a state allowing abortion... Or Canada, or anywhere really.

OTOH, in the anti abortion states, voters will have this warm feeling they did something right... Forgetting that abortion seeker just moved somewhere else.

So it's going to be an interesting hypocrisy.
The only person who will get charged are those either too stupid to go to another place for a week, or trying to make a case and overturn the overturn.

You're in for a lot of fun.

Louis,

[Kraxis]

Or perhaps there would be a return to the less secure 'home abortions'.

Damn, my grandmother used to tell me about those and they were to say the least scary.

[yesdachi]

I think you guys are right that “home” and away abortions would increase but wouldn’t a “home” abortion or one in a different country still be illegal if caught? It would only be risky if others knew about the pregnancy but you couldn’t just go on vacation with an obvious bun in the oven and return without and not have someone scream murderer! Same way you couldn’t go on vacation with your toddler and return without and not be asked, “where’s your kid?”

[solypsist]

you could expect a rise in deaths from back-alley abortions and teen mothers. not everyone can afford to cross state lines (assuming the state is even nearby). more black women would be sentenced to jailtime than white women, further disrupting social and economically unstable areas (like poor areas of the south). with the iraq war as background music, it would be the early 1970s all over again, which were pretty bad times to be an american.

[Kraxis]

I think you guys are right that “home” and away abortions would increase but wouldn’t a “home” abortion or one in a different country still be illegal if caught? It would only be risky if others knew about the pregnancy but you couldn’t just go on vacation with an obvious bun in the oven and return without and not have someone scream murderer! Same way you couldn’t go on vacation with your toddler and return without and not be asked, “where’s your kid?”

Well that is a problem they are facing in Ireland, yet I don't hear about Irish girls getting prosecuted for abortion in N. Ireland or England.

I don't know about the US or individual state's laws (in case this should come to fruition), but wouldn't this be like prosecuting a man for having smoked weed in Amsterdam???

[yesdachi]

...but wouldn't this be like prosecuting a man for having smoked weed in Amsterdam???

Sure, except smoking weed is not murder like the pro-lifers say abortion is.

[Kanamori]

With most law, you would be able to cross the state lines and have it available; I can't really think of any laws that forbid their citizens from doing certain things in other areas not under their jurisdiction, and I can't imagine the other jurisdiction policing their laws for them. But, abortion clinics aren't exactly common sights in places around the country; it would be more than just hopping across the border of a state.

[Kanamori]

Sure, except smoking weed is not murder like the pro-lifers say abortion is.

That's because murder of the violent adult-killing-adult sense is pretty illegal everywhere.

[Kraxis]

Sure, except smoking weed is not murder like the pro-lifers say abortion is.

Well they can say what they want, but if that man can't be prosecuted for smoking weed (I don't know if the act of smoking is illegal in itself) then you can't have a doublestandard that says another crime-that-isn't-a-crime-in-the-place-it-was-permitted is up for prosecution. Where would it end? Homosexuals getting thrown to jail when they crossed state borders because they were known to do their stuff at home but in this place it was illegal? Come on...

[yesdachi]

Well they can say what they want, but if that man can't be prosecuted for smoking weed (I don't know if the act of smoking is illegal in itself) then you can't have a doublestandard that says another crime-that-isn't-a-crime-in-the-place-it-was-permitted is up for prosecution. Where would it end? Homosexuals getting thrown to jail when they crossed state borders because they were known to do their stuff at home but in this place it was illegal? Come on...

Hummm, my mind is starting to swirl. Wouldn’t the murder of a US citizen (unborn babies already have some rights) by a US citizen even if in another country still be a prosecutable offence back in the US?

I’m pro-choice and trying to play devils advocate is hurting my head.

[TinCow]

Well they can say what they want, but if that man can't be prosecuted for smoking weed (I don't know if the act of smoking is illegal in itself) then you can't have a doublestandard that says another crime-that-isn't-a-crime-in-the-place-it-was-permitted is up for prosecution. Where would it end? Homosexuals getting thrown to jail when they crossed state borders because they were known to do their stuff at home but in this place it was illegal? Come on...

The US doesn't care where the act was committed. If you are a US citizen, then US courts have jurisdiction over you. If you smoke weed in Amsterdam, you can be arrested for it when you get home. Just because it doesn't actually happen doesn't mean it's not possible.

Also, for the record, in most states that allow abortion, it is illegal for non-residents to receive them. In-state doctors who give abortions can be prosecuted for giving them to out-of-state residents.

[Kanamori]

The US doesn't care where the act was committed. If you are a US citizen, then US courts have jurisdiction over you. If you smoke weed in Amsterdam, you can be arrested for it when you get home.

I thought that wherever you were, you were subject to the laws of that land. I am under 21, but I can drink in England. Or, is that incorrect, does it specify 'no citizen shall...'? And, I guess I can't imagine other countries letting Federal Agents enforce US laws on their land.

Also, for the record, in most states that allow abortion, it is illegal for non-residents to receive them. In-state doctors who give abortions can be prosecuted for giving them to out-of-state residents.

I'm assuming that's when the state's law says that explicitly, no?

Hummm, my mind is starting to swirl. Wouldn’t the murder of a US citizen (unborn babies already have some rights) by a US citizen even if in another country still be a prosecutable offence back in the US?

I believe that would have to be a Federal law.

[TinCow]

I thought that wherever you were, you were subject to the laws of that land. I am under 21, but I can drink in England. Or, is that incorrect, does it specify 'no citizen shall...'? And, I guess I can't imagine other countries letting Federal Agents enforce US laws on their land.

You're right, but not seeing the whole thing. As a US citizen you are always subject to US federal law. Whether your act was illegal in the country it was committed in is irrelevant to the situation. If you break a US federal law, you can be prosecuted for it, regardless of where it was committed. However, you either have to be brought to the US for a US court to try you. This can be done by you either coming back willingly, by force (i.e. bounty hunters) or by extradition from a nation that will allow it.

I'm assuming that's when the state's law says that explicitly, no?

Correct.

[Kanamori]

You're right, but not seeing the whole thing. As a US citizen you are always subject to US federal law. Whether your act was illegal in the country it was committed in is irrelevant to the situation. If you break a US federal law, you can be prosecuted for it, regardless of where it was committed. However, you either have to be brought to the US for a US court to try you. This can be done by you either coming back willingly, by force (i.e. bounty hunters) or by extradition from a nation that will allow it.

Does the wording of the Federal law need to specify 'citizen' not just 'it is illegal to...' though?

[TinCow]

Does the wording of the Federal law need to specify 'citizen' not just 'it is illegal to...' though?

Nope, as a US citizen you are always subject to all US federal laws. There may be some that specifically exempt US citizens for acts committed abroad, but I am not aware of any if there are. Regardless, it would be an opt out situation, not an opt in.

Clarification on the a couple issues. Drinking when under 21 is not illegal if you do it outside the US because all US drinking age laws are state laws. There is no federal drinking age. You can thank Reagan for coercing the states to all adopt 21, before that it was split between 21 and 18 depending on the state. Marijuana use in Amsterdam is illegal because federal law criminalizes its use. Since it's federal and you're a citizen, you are subject to it abroad.

[Kanamori]

I thought the drinking age was state law, but I saw something on the internet when I was double-checking... guess I didn't read carefully enough. I knew that all the states were basically coerced, because Wisconsin was the last to give in. But I guessed that maybe since then it had become a Federal law. Anyways, thanks for the clarification.

[Tribesman]

Well that is a problem they are facing in Ireland, yet I don't hear about Irish girls getting prosecuted for abortion in N. Ireland or England.

Not prosecuted , but it has led to very lengthy court cases where they have tried to stop women from travelling . Often in rather nasty cases involving rape victims or incestuous relationships .
All very nice and civilised .

[Kraxis]

The US doesn't care where the act was committed. If you are a US citizen, then US courts have jurisdiction over you. If you smoke weed in Amsterdam, you can be arrested for it when you get home. Just because it doesn't actually happen doesn't mean it's not possible.

Also, for the record, in most states that allow abortion, it is illegal for non-residents to receive them. In-state doctors who give abortions can be prosecuted for giving them to out-of-state residents.

Aww, that is harsh. Bu to be honest I don't know if we don't have it the same way here (though about weed it would be legal since smoking it is not illegal, only the posession).
But the point here (about the abortion) is exactly state law and not federal law. So in one state it is pre-meditated murder in the other it is perfectly legal. And let's assume that the courtruling will push the states further apart, so that the no-no to abortion states will treat it as murder, while the others allow people from other states to have abortions.
What would happen? Could the states really prosecute the poor girls? Or would it fall under the state law so that you could have abortions still?

[Del Arroyo]

Nonsense.

You target the doctors, not the patients. If a doctor performs an abortion in a state where they are illegal, his license is revoked and he can face criminal charges. This is especially perfect given that medical licenses are dispensed on a state level.

Targeting the women would be silly, obviously.

DA

[Soulforged]

Nonsense.

You target the doctors, not the patients. If a doctor performs an abortion in a state where they are illegal, his license is revoked and he can face criminal charges. This is especially perfect given that medical licenses are dispensed on a state level.

Targeting the women would be silly, obviously.

And why is that? The decission and cossent is given by her, so she does have some criminal actitude too in doing so. The penalization of abortion protects the eventual human being not the woman, nor the society in general, just one eventual human being. All conducts tendent to provoque certain damage on the fetus must be considered criminal as long as it's illegal of course.

[Del Arroyo]

And why is that? The decission and cossent is given by her, so she does have some criminal actitude too in doing so. The penalization of abortion protects the eventual human being not the woman, nor the society in general, just one eventual human being. All conducts tendent to provoque certain damage on the fetus must be considered criminal as long as it's illegal of course.

If the real goal is to reduce the availability and frequency of abortions, and also to make a moral statement, then targetting the doctors would achieve the end-- without all the collateral damage of legal ambiguities.

Laws are made-- or at least they should be made-- with the intention of getting results.

DA

[bmolsson]

Why not use a GPS on all fertile womens and check where they go ? Also have them to take pregancy tests monthly and if they are pregnant, give them a travel ban. Even might consider to force them to state recommended diets and exclude them from certain jobs, until they have done their duty to the state and contributed with another citizen.
Geez, some of you guy's......

[Louis de la Ferte Ste Colombe]

Nonsense.

You target the doctors, not the patients. If a doctor performs an abortion in a state where they are illegal, his license is revoked and he can face criminal charges. This is especially perfect given that medical licenses are dispensed on a state level.

Targeting the women would be silly, obviously.

DA

Targetting the doctor does not change the issue. The doctors go in states where abortion is allowed, the women travel and noone get charged. Ever.

Interesting Tincow/ Kanamori discussion. I'd like to have an expert point of view on that...

It's also interesting to note that some so called "prolife" groups strategy is to make abortion a state law. From what Tincow/ Kanamori says, this is going to be self defeating.
So why would they do that?

Louis,

[Del Arroyo]

Targetting the doctor does not change the issue. The doctors go in states where abortion is allowed, the women travel and noone get charged. Ever.

Interesting Tincow/ Kanamori discussion. I'd like to have an expert point of view on that...

It's also interesting to note that some so called "prolife" groups strategy is to make abortion a state law. From what Tincow/ Kanamori says, this is going to be self defeating.
So why would they do that?

Louis,

I think you misunderstand. If the goal is to reduce the occurrence of abortions, then this most definitely can be achieved. If you reduce the availability of abortions, they will be harder to get, and fewer women will get them. Period.

Furthermore, by making it illegal in many states, a strong moral message would be sent, further discouraging women who consider abortion.

Nope. Not self-defeating at all. I'm not pro-life by the way, just analyzing.

DA

[Navaros]

Lets imagine that in the future that the Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade. Now individual states can make abortion a criminal offence, basically pre-meditated murder. What should the punishment for a woman who gets an abortion be? Should the doctor also be charged?

Punishment should be execution, or at the very least, life imprisonment with zero possibility for parole. Both for the "woman" and the "doctor" who participated in the murder of the baby. I put quotes around the words because in reality they are neither; that would require humanity first - but humans would not murder babies.

[Xiahou]

you could expect a rise in deaths from back-alley abortions and teen mothers. not everyone can afford to cross state lines (assuming the state is even nearby). more black women would be sentenced to jailtime than white women, further disrupting social and economically unstable areas (like poor areas of the south). with the iraq war as background music, it would be the early 1970s all over again, which were pretty bad times to be an american.

Would there be more abortion related deaths? Maybe. Alot more? Probably not. The often stated statistics of thousands of women dying each year from "back alley abortions" was largely a fabrication- most were performed by licensed physicians anyhow. Second, why would more black women be sentenced? From what data I've seen, close to 70% of abortions are performed on white women.

[bmolsson]

Punishment should be execution, or at the very least, life imprisonment with zero possibility for parole. Both for the "woman" and the "doctor" who participated in the murder of the baby. I put quotes around the words because in reality they are neither; that would require humanity first - but humans would not murder babies.

Did your mother beat you as a child ??

[Louis de la Ferte Ste Colombe]

I think you misunderstand. If the goal is to reduce the occurrence of abortions, then this most definitely can be achieved. If you reduce the availability of abortions, they will be harder to get, and fewer women will get them. Period.

Furthermore, by making it illegal in many states, a strong moral message would be sent, further discouraging women who consider abortion.

Nope. Not self-defeating at all. I'm not pro-life by the way, just analyzing.

DA

It's a funny analyze...

I'd suggest you have a look at Ireland as a good recent showcase of abortion regulation completly failing.

Reducing the availability of abortion in Ireland only had the effect of sending Irish women to Northern Ireland and England when it was necessary.
It has failed before, it will fail again.

You know little about women seeking abortion: no law is going to discourage them, that's why you have self admnistred abortion, back alleys abortion, all those dangerous alternatives to abortion tourism. Or just plain lawful abortion. It's going to be interesting to see so called "prolife" reaction when we'll get the first cases of dead women who failed to get a safe abortion. How "prolife" will that be?

Is it possible to reduce the number of abortions? Yes probably... Some practices helps, mostly sexual education, and making contraceptives available (for that look at Eastern Europe evolution...). If you already got decent sexual education, and that contraceptives are available (ie, abortion is not seen as a contraceptive), then you got little room for reducing abortion.

Louis,

[BDC]

Would there be more abortion related deaths? Maybe. Alot more? Probably not. The often stated statistics of thousands of women dying each year from "back alley abortions" was largely a fabrication- most were performed by licensed physicians anyhow. Second, why would more black women be sentenced? From what data I've seen, close to 70% of abortions are performed on white women.

I know in Britain before it was legal, the rich women would just get some doctors to do it quietly (or find an excuse to do it legally), and poor women would end up with some local woman sticking a big needle into them.

There was a film about this...