Why Medical Termination Of Pregnancy ? Asks Indian Judiciary

In an order of far-reaching implications, the Supremeregistered medical practitioner of opinion, formed in
Court of India on July 21 allowed a mentally-challengedgood faith, if
orphan and rape victim to give birth to her child . In the(i) the continuance of the pregnancy would involve a
process, the Supreme Court had also overturned arisk to the life of the pregnant woman or of grave
Punjab and Haryana High Court order dated July 17injury to her physical or mental health; or
2009, directing the termination of pregnancy of the(ii) there is a substantial risk that if the child were born, it
19-year-old girl, who was raped at a Nari Niketanwould suffer from such physical or mental
(Women’s Home) run by the Chandigarhabnormalities to be seriously handicapped.
Administration.The Act further states that in determining whether the
The three-judge Bench headed by Chief Justice K Gcontinuance of a pregnancy would involve such risk of
Balakrishnan said “We are not in favour ofinjury to the health, account may be taken of the
termination of pregnancy”, adding further thatpregnant women’s actual or reasonable
nature would give protection to them.foreseeable environment. The Act also mentions that,
However, if to analyze an expert team’s report onif the pregnancy is caused by rape, the anguish
the mental condition of the victim, which was read outcaused by such pregnancy shall be presumed to
in the court during the hearing, it painted a grim pictureconstitute a grave injury to the mental health of the
of the victim, as a mildly mentally challenged personpregnant woman.
who is unable to understand the concept of pregnancyNow, taking a hard look at the facts we have, here,
and conception. Even her psychiatrist andthe rape victim is not only mentally challenged, but also
gynaecologist had advised constant supervision of thethe prospect of her ‘actual or reasonably
victim, in their respective medical reports, to ensure herforeseeable environment’ improving is slim. As per
overall well being as she may not be able to take carethe medical reports, she is also in no state of mind to
of herself alone. In short, while the medical expertsunderstand the concept of pregnancy and conception,
who have studied the victim had clearly stated that theleave alone raising the child. Also, there is no guarantee
woman is not fit mentally and physically to continuewhatsoever that the child will be born in good health,
with the pregnancy, the rationale of law had surprisinglyand without any physical or mental abnormalities that
chosen to take just the opposite route,  for somewould leave him/her handicapped for life. Further, we
reason.can’t say now if continuing the pregnancy would
Predictably, the judgment was welcomed with lots ofinvolve a risk to her life.
silent criticisms, and ‘what if’ questions from theShockingly, the woman is an orphan too. MTP Act
public at large, and let me also joins them in analyzingsays that , no pregnancy of a woman, who has not
the different aspects of the ruling, and its implications.attained the age of eighteen years, or, who, having
As someone having a third person perspective of theattained the age of eighteen years, is a lunatic, shall be
developments, I would like to ask the readers,terminated except with the consent in writing of her
- What would be the fate of the child and the mother?guardian.
- Why should we have an MTP Act in place if aThe court might have taken refuge on its confidence
mentally challenged  rape victim is not bound by itson the social service organisations advocating for the
purview?rape victim’s rights. Can we expect the NGOs to
The court order may be justifiable as a caveat to theact as the true guardian of the mother and child in
misuse of Medical Termination of Pregnancy. Howeverletter and spirit ? then to what extent ?
this decision seems to prejudice the legislative intent ofSumming it all up, it appears to me that the best option
 THE MEDICAL TERMINATION OF PREGNANCYwould have been to terminate the pregnancy
ACT, 1971.(considering the peculiar nature of this case),  rather
The Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971than letting things escalate to more complexities and
states that a pregnancy may be terminated by arisks to the mother/child.