Hard to know where to begin with this one, it's raises so many questions. The judge is clearly testing the waters but what is the end game here. The abortion can't be reversed so what does the person bringing the case hope to gain?
Could an embryo then sue a prospective father for failing to provide funds to ensure the optimum health of the woman during pregnancy? Will abortion clinics need the consent of a man to perform an abortion? How would you prove at that stage who had fathered the child? How would you prove someone had aborted a pregnancy rather than miscarried if their medical records are confidential?
I could go on posing questions all night. You would hope that the unworkability of trying to control a woman's reproductive rights, in this way, would quickly become apparent but we live in batshit crazy times so who knows which way this will go. Either way it's yet another attack in the war on women and I wonder if it will end before Gilead becomes reality.