Thank you very much for reading my long comment on this.
As far as laws are concerned, I think they are suitable for extreme cases. Existing laws and appeals to the courts are always only the very last resort, or should be (whereby I make an absolute distinction between natural persons in dispute with each other and disputes between natural persons and organs of another legal form).
However, where laws are rigorously exploited to have disputes settled by the courts, they are, in my view, used too early. Some laws, because they are anchored in criminal law, have a high fear potential. But it is interesting, as with this abortion law in Germany, that although it is a criminal offence, the custom and acceptance of abortion is nevertheless high. The large loophole that this law offers is used by the majority, I think. Therefore, and although it is criminalised, the legislation seems less threatening, at least in this country.
The tendency to use the courts too early is one that I think has increased. Alternatives, for example, such as preliminary talks, dispute mediators, therapeutic and other services, etc. seem useful where they are properly applied and work towards the mediating outcome.
... Sometimes I think the cries for "there should be a law!" are an expression that shows that people indeed don't know much about the fact what written law actually means, and what long term consequences it can have, once a law has finally been passed. It's very hard to get rid of it.
It is true that the women who have had an abortion are usually more emotionally and psychologically burdened than the men involved (although I think the men can have equally intense feelings of loss and I am not denying that to anyone).
Good bye to you. ... Oh, where are you located, may I ask?
I'm English but have been resident in Thailand for 11 years now.