I'm sorry but that is all on the woman, if religious or moral views get in the way of abortion that is is not on the man and he shouldn't be held responsible for it.
The point I'm making is that the choice to have a "paper abortion" is not
equal to the choice to have an actual abortion.
Putting aside concern for children, many people advocate "paper abortions" as a means of evening the score between men and women. But it
can't even the score, because by its nature a "paper abortion" would be easier, less complicated and have fewer moral or religious implications than an actual abortion.
So when proponents advocate in favor of "paper abortions," they're not advocating for
equality, instead they're seeking something much better than what is available to women. They're asking for a benefit that women don't have and likely can't ever have (all the while ignoring the effects on a third person).
If men truly wanted a choice
equal to the one currently available to women, then "paper abortion" should be (1) difficult to obtain, depending on where you live; (2) require the father to listen to the heartbeat of his child (in addition to other restrictions); (3) require the father to walk a gauntlet of protestor's calling him a "murderer" and (4) for some portion of men, they should be told that signing the document will result in the death of another person.