Miscarriage of justice?

Earlier this month, a Mumbai housewife delivered a baby that died within hours because it had ‘anencephaly’, a serious medical condition in which the foetus has no brain and hardly any skull. The parents became aware of it in the 26th week of pregnancy and were told by doctors it would either be a miscarriage or a stillbirth or the baby would die soon after birth. How heart-breaking for the parents to know that! They were naturally shattered and disturbed and wished to terminate the pregnancy but could not do so because the law disallows termination after the 20th week.

In a similar case of 2008, another Mumbai couple had come to know (after the 20th week) that their unborn baby had a complete congenital heart blockage. According to doctors, the child would need a surgery to implant a pacemaker right after birth and further surgeries every five years to change the pacemaker. Realising that frequent surgeries and life-long cardiological care would be traumatic for the child, who would not be able to live a normal life and also that they could not afford such a specialised long-term treatment, the couple approached the Court for permission to terminate the pregnancy. The Court denied permission citing they had 'failed to establish that the child once born faced a substantial risk of severe physical or mental disability' and that the Court could not make an exception and exercise extraordinary judgment. The woman suffered a miscarriage in the 27th week of her pregnancy.

In both cases, permission to terminate the pregnancy was denied because it was beyond the legally prescribed 20 week period, although the foetus suffered from a serious physical abnormality and the baby’s chances to live a normal life were negligible.

What does the law say?:

The law referred to above is embodied in the ‘Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971’ (MTP Act), which prescribes circumstances under which a pregnancy can be legally terminated and the procedural formalities for the same. As per the MTP Act, a pregnancy between 12 and 20 weeks can be terminated by a registered medical practitioner (‘RMP’), if at least two RMPs are of the opinion that continuation of pregnancy EITHER involves risk to the woman’s life or serious harm to her physical or mental health OR there is a substantial risk that the child, when born, would suffer from physical or mental abnormalities and be seriously handicapped. Requirement of opinion by two RMPs does not apply where termination of pregnancy is immediately necessary to save a woman’s life. For termination of pregnancy under 12 weeks, opinion of only one RMP is considered adequate.

The 20 week limit was most likely decided considering risks to a pregnant woman’s life and also to curb cases of illegal or forced abortions or where the woman is kept in the dark about risks. One cannot therefore fault the Court as it had to take a decision within the provisions and limitations of the MTP Act. The Court cannot consider softer issues like emotions, mental strength or financial ability of parents to cope with a situation, etc. while delivering its verdict.

What about the parents?

The issue is not only about the 20 week limit. It is also about parents’ preparedness and ability – emotional, physical, mental and financial – to raise a child with abnormalities or serious medical conditions.

Starting a family is arguably the most joyous phase of marriage. A couple’s preparations to welcome their child commence much in advance as they start visualising the unending moments of happiness and fun which the future would hold in store for them. It also marks the phase of becoming more responsible, to be able to provide a good life to the child. All that a couple wants is a healthy child and meticulously follows the ‘DOs and DON’Ts’ to ensure the baby is fine. So imagine their shock and plight when they learn that their yet-to-be-born child suffers from some serious abnormality or medical condition! In an instant all their dreams and grand plans are shattered and they are faced with an extremely difficult and daunting challenge for the rest of their lives! Needless to say, it is easier said than done.

A child suffering from a severe abnormality or medical condition would need regular medicines and doctor’s visits; he / she would also be unable to eat, play, enjoy and live a life like any other normal kid. The child might even consider itself inferior seeing other children play and enjoy the beautiful childhood days, leading to mental trauma. The child’s education suffers, which in turn impacts the chances of being gainfully employed and becoming financially independent. The parents are often weighed down with the responsibility of providing physical, emotional and financial support to the child during their lifetimes and as regards financial support, even thereafter. Their own lives come to a grinding halt and revolve only around the well being of the child. The cumulative effect of this perpetual all-round pressure can be back-breaking and may lead even to the parent's nervous breakdown or depression. Do parents deserve to go through this ordeal for the rest of their lives because the law is not to be up to date or up to the mark, as considered by medical experts?

Amendments delayed due to conflict with other laws:

In progressive nations like the USA, UK and some other European countries, the limit ranges from 22 to even 28 weeks (as in Cyprus) which is sure to have been decided after a careful and all-round consideration of medical issues as also impact on society. It also implies that termination of pregnancy beyond 20 weeks is possible, without unduly risking the life of the mother.

The MTP Act was enacted in 1971 and has hardly undergone any significant amendment to keep pace with the times and the progress of medical science in India. An important reason for that is understood to be the close linkage of this issue with other equally critical issues like sex determination of the foetus, which is illegal under the Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques Act, 1994 and female foeticide, which is still prevalent due to the quest for a male child and an ‘heir’. There have been instances of female foeticide under the guise of abortions for saving the mother’s life. The amendments therefore need to be comprehensive ones to address all the three issues, and need to be done very soon.

Conclusion:

No doubt losing an unborn child is heart breaking for parents but they can overcome the grief over a period of time. But to see their child suffer every single day, unable to live a normal life and be dependent on others for every little thing can be worse and may, after a period, become unbearable. Where abnormality or serious medical condition is not detected or known before the child’s birth, the parents have no choice but to face the situation, but where it is known beforehand, the law should be amended to become flexible and humane enough to honour the parents’ wishes to terminate the pregnancy if the mother’s life is not at risk. Termination of pregnancy in such cases should entirely be the parents’ personal decision because every couple has the right to be parents to a healthy child.

Proverbs: Funny Side Up!

As we know, proverbs are short and crisp clichés expressing a truth or a piece of advice based on wisdom, teachings or experiences of earlier generations, generally accepted over a period of time. They are metaphors which summarise and communicate a deeper and comprehensive meaning or messages like certain recommended ground rules of good conduct or virtues. School children are taught about proverbs because examples simplify understanding of the underlying meaning or message and are not easily forgotten.

But in today’s world, have these age old proverbs retained the same meanings or have they started to become irrelevant? Has the deep-rooted cynicism thanks to decades of rule by incompetent, myopic, arrogant and brazenly corrupt governments made us interpret the ‘truth or pieces of advice’ rolled in proverbs in a manner altogether different from the known or intended ones? Here’s a ‘funny side up’ look at some of the well known proverbs.

1. Proverb: Ask no questions and you will be told no lies.

Interpretation: Despite overwhelming - and at times, conclusive – evidence, including that captured on camera, politicians accused of corruption always blatantly lie, vehemently deny any wrongdoing and cry out loud that all allegations are false, baseless, intended at character assassination and opposition’s conspiracy. Some even throw a challenge that if allegations are proved, they would quit politics! So, if public, activists, media or Courts do not ask any questions to politicians about their involvement in corruption and scams, they will be told no lies in reply.

2. Proverb: Charity begins at home.

Interpretation: Politicians and their families set up NGOs or trusts for philanthropic purposes and betterment of society, which collect lakhs in grants from the government’s social welfare departments and even donations from public. These NGOs / trusts which are controlled and managed from ‘home’, exercise complete control over the funds and use them first for betterment of the lives of the ‘home’ owners. At times, some portion of the funds is also spent on the purposes for which they were raised! Charity thus begins at home and even ensures praise for the politicians and family for their acts of philanthropy.

3. Proverb: A black hen lays a white egg.

Interpretation: Expressing very strong anti-racist sentiments, this proverb seeks to drive home the message that money is money, irrespective of its colour! The most prominent followers of this teaching are politicians, business tycoons, anti social elements and other powerful people. They firmly believe that value of money has zero correlation with its colour. That is why they regularly and effortlessly convert black money into white and vice versa... and in the process, multiply it too! Sadly, this non-discriminatory approach towards the colour of money is looked down upon by everyone else!!

4. Proverb: A man is known by the company he keeps.

Interpretation: Corporatisation of politics and politicisation of corporations is today the norm. Powerful politicians grant favours, approvals, concessions and exemptions to companies of friendly businessmen, notwithstanding the rules and satisfaction of eligibility criteria. They thus wield the power to determine a company’s fortunes and consequently its value. A politician, by virtue of his position, snaps up equity in such companies at par in the initial stages, as his 'fee' and offloads it once the value soars up. He remains invested and mints money from profitable companies and gets rid of companies which start losing value for any reason. He is thus a man well known for the 'company' he keeps.

And finally...

5. Proverb: Practice makes a man perfect.

Interpretation: Not everyone in a plum posting can do full 'justice' to it and exploit its 'potential' to the fullest. To actually do it without raising suspicion for a long time or to deftly handle storms that kick up, cannot be learnt in a jiffy. It takes years of hard toil and possibly some not so successful attempts before one can claim to have mastered or perfected the art. The ability to remain unfazed and unruffled during crisis when the whole world is asking for your head is equally important and can only be painstakingly learnt. Seasoned politicians are therefore able to pull off corruption, scams and scandals with style and consummate ease and also get away unscathed from the clutches of law, having perfected the modus operandi by years of rigorous practice they have put in!

The Middle Finger Salute!

On Monday, Union Steel Minister Beni Prasad Verma, in his attempt to extend support to Union Law Minister Salman Khurshid over allegations of misappropriation of funds of Khurshid’s family run trust, told media persons that “Rs 71 lakh is a small amount for a Central Minister. A person like Salman Khurshid will not do any scam for Rs 71 lakh…had it been Rs 71 crore, I would take it seriously.”

Couple of weeks ago, Union Coal Minister Shriprakash Jaiswal, at a function at a girls’ college compared the joy of a new victory to a new marriage and said that “as the years go by, the celebrations become old, just as the wife loses her charm as she grows old.”

Three months ago, Samajwadi Party supremo Mulayam Singh Yadav’s brother and UP’s PWD Minister Shivpal Yadav literally gave official sanction to state PWD bureaucrats to indulge in corruption, when in a meeting he told them, “If you work hard, you can steal a little, but don't behave like dacoits.”

These are some of the most atrocious, arrogant, insensitive and disgraceful statements in recent times made by senior ministers, who as democratically elected representatives, are expected to act in a responsible manner and maintain a certain degree of decency and discipline in public life. So are these statements are purely gaffes arising out of the proverbial Freudian slip? Don’t think so. After spending years in public life (read ‘in power’) they seem to develop a ‘devil-may-care attitude’ about the consequences of their actions or lack thereof. In each of the above instance, the minister concerned was fully aware that the proceedings were being video recorded by TV channels. 

Despite the statements being captured in entirety on camera, the ministers adopted the standard but ridiculous defences of being ‘misquoted’, ‘quoted out of context’, ‘their statements were distorted’ and ‘it was not what they meant’. When everyone can clearly see and hear all on the tape, where is the question of being misquoted or quoted out of context or distortion? Another standard defence is that the tapes are ‘doctored’ and should be sent for forensic analysis or crying foul of the opposition’s conspiracy to malign. Nothing but lame excuses, desperate face saving exercises and delaying tactics!

The statements by Verma and Yadav are open and brazen endorsements of corruption and in fact, Verma’s statement almost carries a reprimand for insulting a person of the stature of Salman Khurshid by an allegation of a petty amount of Rs 71 lakh! On the other hand, the coal minister’s comments were outright derogatory and disrespectful towards women. But when questioned by the media, none of these ministers showed any remorse for their statements, but all of them made politically correct (and sensible) statements, which were diametrically opposite to their original statements which created the ruckus. Funnily, Yadav even said that media was not allowed in the meeting where he made that statement! So does he mean that the same instructions to bureaucrats in a secret and closed door meeting are just fine?

Neither the Prime Minister nor the UP Chief Minister thought it fit to crack the whip and seek immediate resignations of the concerned ministers or even admonish them for making such outrageous and shocking statements which hurt public sentiments. Did they think these statements were not significant enough to merit any action or even attention? In such situations, politicians with strong mass base are absolutely sure that nothing will befall them and very soon some other high impact event would divert attention of the media and public and the present episode would be obliterated from public memory, which in any case, is very short. That is why they summarily dismiss demands for their resignations. When too much media and public pressure – and consequently, party pressure - builds up and they realise they cannot get away, they offer pathetically lame and highly qualified apologies purely as a formality. Sample this useless apology from Shriprakash Jaiswal... “IF anyone is upset because I was misquoted or because my comment was taken out of context or because some part of my comment was deleted, THEN I apologise.” How considerate! And once the formality of the apology is over, the person happily continues in office and it is business as usual.

What does the common man feel about all this? Corporators, MLAs and MPs which the people collectively elect to represent them in corporations, state legislative assemblies and the parliament not only show utter disregard to him but also fleece them while getting work done in government departments. The common man has no access to his own elected representatives and has to spend time and money even to have an audience with them. And all this arrogance when the Union and State Governments are regularly embroiled in corruption, scams and scandals! On top of that, irresponsible and shameful statements like these add insult to the common man’s injury. Coming to think of it, since we the people elect our representatives, it is indeed our fault if we end up with such poor and sub-standard leadership. But in the next elections, even if we want a change, we have to make a choice between ‘bad’, the ‘worse’ and the ‘worst’ candidates. Quite a choice that!

It confirms the belief that democracy is a system in which citizens, after dutifully casting votes in elections proudly show their middle fingers on TV channels and the elected representatives show their middle fingers to the citizens for the next five years!

A late starter...

Hello friends!

Have (finally) decided to start blogging! It all started couple of years ago when a former business associate turned friend Rohit Yagnik, after reading my Facebook posts and some poems (all on the then political scenario) mentioned to me “Sirjee aap ko blog likhna chaahiye...”. Wifey dear has always been saying I should focus on writing, and regularly at that. I used to laugh it off, thinking who will read? But of late some more friends told me to take writing a bit seriously and I thought I might as well give it a go. So a blog which was created way back in 2009 gets its first post only now!

The first challenge was to decide on the name, but then I remembered that Rohit had already suggested “Sanjay Uvācha” (Sanskrit: meaning “Sanjay says”) for the blog. As all would know, ‘Sanjay’ is a character from ‘Mahabharat’ who had the gift of seeing events happening at a distance. He is also known to be brutally frank in his recital of the day's battle of Kurukshetra to the blind king Dhritarashtra.

By the way, this blog has got nothing in common with the teachings of the Bhagavad Geeta...it is just a written manifestation of my thoughts. So relax!

Big THANKS to Rohit and my other friends - Shilpa Sharma, Kapil Muzumdar & Rahul Datar– and of course wifey dear Preeti, for the inspiration to blog!