degsme:

Since a layperson isn't trained in reading an ultrasound there is no medical purpose for showing her the image unless she wants to see it. Raw data without context is meaningless.

Ok, then, how about a picture of a fetus at the same age? You do not need to be a doctor to understand a picture.

Could you explain more about what harm you see this doing? What sort of relationships do women typically have with their abortion providers, and in what ways does this sort of thing harm that relationship? It seems to me that any potential harm would easily be done by a doctor saying "this is BS but I have to give it to you." Am I wrong?

degsme:

And before you object that the Yugo opinion has nothing to do with dentistry, what does the non-legal, non-scientific OPINION about what is "human" have to do with a woman controlling her reproductive organs? Its just political propoganda in either case

It's your opinion that abortion is just a woman controlling her reproductive organs. I think there is a moral question involved in abortion (science can inform the decision by providing information but it can't make the value judgement) related to a legitimate state interest. There's no parallel in cavity removal.

Regardless, some women - maybe a small minority - do regret their decision to have an abortion. (And yes, I realize some may regret their decision not to.) Does society have no interest here at all? Also, let me ask you this: if it really was true that abortion resulted in increased risk of depression (and one greater than childbirth) would it then be okay for the state to do this?