Rape is one of the few exceptions.<quoted text>
Why would anyone want to terrorize a female that's been raped, forced against her will or in precarious other mentally and/or physically damaging or harmful situations, to suffer further though, especially if it's within the first trimester?
While I do not feel the process should be used as any sort of continual birth control (especially with suchlong time free flowing availibilty of such) I can't quite wrap a logical shred of anything around any "right of the government" to interfere in a personal medical procedure like that.
I think that's another instance of when the politics of men (and women) needs to butt out-especially when such has nothing to do with any of them personally. As in, too much "Government interference" applies there as well.
But an informed decision is always the right approach to any medical procedure. Denying women the opportunity to make an informed decision about having an abortion makes no sense.
An ultrasound is required before any invasive medical procedure even to remove a benign tumor.
Women undergo a procedure that stops a human heartbeat and removes a developing human being from their bodies without having undergone a sonogram or an ultrasound first to make an informed decision. Many women have no idea what is going on inside their bodies or are even informed verbally.
This has nothing to do with government interfering with a procedure of choice. It has everything to do with following medical protocol and women being given the opportunity to make an informed choice - not an emotional one.