the case of the aborted abortion
we live in a country of a billion people. this country is so vast, that had it not been for the same currency, non requirement of passport and such other details, one would have been forgiven for thinking that this is not a single country but countries. not poetry, but you get the picture.
how do these people get along with each other, you ask ? quite well. thank you. with some help from our north western neighbors.
We have communal riots. thousands die. it is rationalized. bomb blasts. hundreds die. millions live in fear. no one is caught. if one is ever caught, he is acquitted. police investigations are scripts for a laugh riot. if one is convicted, his execution becomes a debate between the ruling and the opposition.
so i read the daily newspaper thinking and grumbling about the state of affairs of our nation and decide to do nothing, get ready fast so that i don’t get stuck in the morning jam.
so in the entire above discussion of my thoughts where does the abortion issue come in the picture ?
here’s my take. there is a law that says, that you cannot abort the child fetus after a certain period, as that would be a crime. something like jumping a red light. but a bit more. a lot more.
now. its all very sweet to go to the high court and ask the judges to give a decision to allow the abortion of the child. how practical was it though.
in a country where law is relatively strict and relatively fewer instances of proper conviction and sentencing, what on earth was the bombay couple thinking when they wen to the high court for deciding something that anyways happen all the time ?
why go to the high court in the first place ? you get the courts in the picture when you have to enforce a right. or to sort out a dispute.
in the present case, hypothetically suppose the couple, had got a favorable report from a doctor and then without the intervention of the court, aborted the child, then? they would have got what they wanted and then carried on their lives.
but they would have broken the law you say. I say, would you prosecute them? If I was there, I would rather spend my time, energy and money on prosecuting people who deserve to be prosecuted.
and then after the abortion the law could have been challenged. here a point to ponder for the high court.
point 1: it is for the parents to decide whether to get life on earth or not. not yours. if parents decide that they would not like to get this life on earth. I do not think you or anyone else, should have anything to say in that. after all parents are the best care a child can get. not the high court.
provisio: when the parents for extraneous reasons decide not to have a girl child.
point 2: suppose the child is born with defects, because of which he dies immediately or lives a life like a paralysed human. just suppose this. now suppose there was a time machine, in which you could have gone back and taken this decision again. with the benefit of knowledge of the consequences, will the high court take the same decision ?
- Posted in: Uncategorized