There are a few questions here, so I'll try and get to them one at a time.

My beliefs are in line with the UK science led laws, in essence before 24 weeks you are dealing with one person and a collection of cells. At 24 weeks, you are dealing with two separate humans one of whom has lesser rights (by virtue of not being born yet) but who's right to life supersedes an economic or sociological argument for termination. That means... pro-choice until 24 weeks and medical abortion afterwards. 24 weeks is when the foetus has a greater than 50% chance of surviving if they are born and given emergency treatment. Those kids are tiny, but they turn into people. Before 24 weeks, that viability isn't there.

At 24 weeks you are essentially saying to women, you can no access a service because the State doesn't believe this is a correct moral choice. HOWEVER, if a young woman were to enact an abortion of her own volition and destroy/remove the foetus after this point, she would likely face no criminal charges.

And yes, I agree... sexual activity and trauma have some comorbidity - but these are exceptions rather than the rule and this needs to be factored into thinking.

And yes, children cannot consent to sex. This is always rape. Abortion rights in these instances should always be protected.... because in this instance, the person's right to bodily autonomy has already been violated and by not allowing access to abortion services, you are continuing to perpetrate and continue the abuse. I didn't want to go into this too much in the article, but in all cases of rape or statutory rape which end in a pregnancy, there should always be an abortion service free at the point of delivery and given concurrently with therapy.