Crumpet head
If abortion clinics are no different to dentists, doctor's surgeries etc, then what are abortion clinics doing to reduce the number of abortions.

I have never heard of anything.

In fact I have heard of abortion clinics that offer no counselling after an abortion, and the only counselling they offer before the abortion is to describe to the woman the actual abortion procedure.

Now this would be different to a dentist surgery for example, where the dentist would probably describe to the patient what to do to avoid the patient coming back again.

Ena,
People will continue to murder, rape and assault people whatever anyone says or does. They always have, they always will.

Stupid logic doesn't help the situation....

The only question that matters in the abortion debate is what is the unborn?

It isn't will live be hard after pregnancy, it isn't will abortions still happen if they are illegal. And plain and simple, science concludes unmistakably that the unborn is a human being.

Anything else is religious/metaphysical beliefs.

Abortion needs to be left to a woman and her conscience Women have the right to advice about the pros and cons of the health side of abortion and that should be given without any moralising.
It's great isn't that other people say a woman should not terminate a pregnancy - and then they go on to say that a single woman should not give up her child.
This is not considering the mother or the child. Not every woman wants to be a mother or should be a mother. There might be fewer abortions and more children available for adoption if those who see it as their role to interfere were less hell bent on insisting that children have the 'right' to be brought up by their natural parent - as if being brought up by a single mother who was not too keen on keeping you anyway is some sort of advantage.
We have made adoption a 'bad' thing when it has been around for as long as man and was sometimes considered to be a great advantage.

HRS, abortion clinics are probably doing about the same to reduce unplanned pregnancy that dentists are doing to reduce tooth decay. They provide information about contraception, prescriptions to patients who require one, information about how to take the pill, and about the momrning-after-pill when required. In any case, women seeking terminations are not just there because of contraceptive failure. It's also largely because of relationship breakdowns. (unplanned pregnancy is the real test for how strong a relationship is) To reduce the number of abortions, perhaps Tony Abbott should provide free relationship counselling instead of trying to talk women out of having a termination.

Women who are undecided about their decision to terminate should certainly receive non-directive counselling if they seek it, but why do you believe that abortion clinics should second-guess the dificult decision that the woman has already made? Do you think that women are not to be trusted to make this decision for themselves? Abortion clinics have a legal obligation to ensure that the women are having an abortion for reasons within the current legal framework and that she is not just there because her husband or parents want her to terminate. It is an anti-coice myth that clinics will provide an abortion on anyone who walks through the door. Women are frequently turned away from clinics in order to give them more time to seek independent non-directive counselling.

Crumpethead, you say, "In theory, if aborting a full term fetus was necessary to save the life of the woman, then yes, it should be a legal option of last resort."

But don't you see that you miss the point completely? If Lesley Cannold gets what she wants there will be no requirement for the woman's life to be at risk. No reason will be needed to get an abortion. It will be abortion simply on demand at any stage of pregnancy.

As it stands today, a woman who has an abortion can be charged under criminal statutes, but in practice this doesn't occur. Who is to say that someone like Julian McGauran becomes Premier and he decides to charge all women who have had an aborton retrospectively, say 30 years after the event? He is probably drawing up charges against over half the female population but if he is committed like Tony Abbott . . . . . .

The anti-abortionists like Julian McGauran can and has successfully hounded a woman and her doctor for inducing an abortion. This situation can be repeated time and time again. Do we want to be like Roumania where women were forced to have babies that they left to rot in orphanages? What makes you think Australian orphanages are ideal places for children to grow up in? Have you read the articles by Bernie Matthews about children growing up in state care?