What case are you making other than "it doesn't work because I said so"?

Something like 90% of abortions are because of social or economic reasons, ie the woman didn't feel like it. That's the percentage of frivolous abortions that could be prevented by placing the minimum amount of repercussions on women.

that's saying exactly the same as vaccine objectors and their doctors should be criminalized for failing to uphold government edicts.

You think legally forcing a dangerous procedure on people is the same as legally preventing a deadly (be design) procedure? WTF?

And, of course, you don't mention fathers at all. Cause it's not even just a matter of the child being involved in the mother's decision, it's also the child's father.

The current system provides absolutely no recourse to father's to protect their children and allows unscrupulous women (ie the kind who would get an abortion) to blackmail their partners with threats of baby murder. And we wonder why there's a fatherhood crisis.

As far as I can see, removing this special exception for murder is already working: thousands of women are going on "sex strikes" and demanding monogamous marriage, and that's without laws even being enforced.

I agree that states could potentially make bad laws but the point is they can make the laws. If the laws are bad where you are, move. If the laws are ineffective, we'll see that pretty quickly, compared to other states.

As for the "bottom-line problems" you mention (but never outline), those can't even be addressed until abortion is illegal because the practice of killing babies hides those problems.