Legalize: Sex selective abortion

I’m sure this is going to be a riveting debate. My position is that sex selective abortion should not be legalized in India. In fact, the present laws need to be strengthened and actually implemented. I agree with the definition. I am going to first give my case and then rebut your claims. First of all, let us look at the reasons that forced the government to illegalize SSA. Abortion was legalised by the Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) Act (1971). By 1979, a group of entrepreneurs set up the New Bhandaris' Antenatal Sex Determination Clinic in Amritsar, Punjab. It began to advertise its services openly through the press and handbills distributed in public places, railway compartments etc. One copy of the handbill reached the Centre for Women's Development Studies (CVIDS) in the summer of 1982. The advertisement referred to daughters as a "liability" to the family and a "threat to the nation', and exhorted expectant parents to avail of the services of the clinic to rid themselves of this danger. In July 1982 a joint 3 meeting convened by these organisations condemned this misuse of scientific technology. The Union Minister made a strong statement expressing his deep concern over the 'highly unethical, unjust and immoral practice'. He exhorted the State Ministers to take appropriate preventive action. The District Medical Officer, Amritsar, interpreted this statement at its face value and threatened the management of the New Bhandaris' Clinic with legal action. In reply, he received a cool question, asking what law had the clinic violated? In his statement to the Lok Sabha, however, the Health Minister ruled out a ban on amniocentesis. saying that "it was for the people to change their attitude to female children. The State Governments, having realized that there was no legal provision to back such action, also remained inactive. The Forum against Sex Determination and Sex Pre-selection (FASDSP) was formed in Bombay in October 1985, its members were from varied backgrounds - feminists, health and human rights activists, persons Involved in the people's science movement etc. It drafted a private member's Bill with the help of a Senior Officer from the State Assembly and had it introduced in the State Assembly by three members. "The Introduction of the Bill added an entirely different dimension to the campaign and forced the State Government to give serious consideration to the Issue. This Bill laid the foundation of the entire legislative exercise at the State and Central Government levels". Source: . http://tinyurl.com...Now, with this background information, we need to assess the topic in hand. The present position of the women, though is improving, is still not at par with men. And culturally, they are bound to be discriminated against. If SSA is legalized, the situation is bound to get worse.1. Cash in on the general discrimination against the women. : There will be no shortage of Bhandaris’ that are going to play on the sentiments and try to cash in on the general discrimination against the women. Given our history, we can be positive that the law will lead to a catastrophe. At least, given the law, the practice is under wraps, and there is a certain taboo in the practice. Given that most people feel justified killing female fetus, legalizing SSA is going to worsen the situation much more. We can take the example of South Korea, South Korea is the only country that equalized its male-female ratio, and it was a country that legalized SSA, and enforced it ‘vigorously’. 2 Greater Crimes: Legalising SSA will almost certainly lead to a skewed sex ratio, which would lead to greater prostitution rackets, kidnapping, sexual violence, as is seen in China and India already. (The rebuttal to your claim that skewed sex ratio is going to increase women’s position has been addressed at the appropriate place. )3. Slippery slope: When we legalise SSA, we can be almost certain that the law would be utilized to its fullest. There would be dangerous precedents, and the females would be killed in large numbers, what next? Designer babies? Going by the freedom of choice argument, we can encourage the people to get designer babies, the babies would have green eyes, blonde hairs, whatever the parents please, the false idea of perfection would be reinforced. The divide between rich and poor would increase, with the rich increasingly tailoring their babies, and greater discarding when they don’t match their ‘standards’. 4: Sex selection is unhealthy: It makes the love for the child conditional. Which is in itself an unhealthy trend. Rebuttal://1) Health of women//I agree. But we need something to deter women going in for SSA. A women who cares for her health can refuse it on the health- grounds. On the illegality grounds. Once you legalise SSA, there is no ground to refuse it, if being pressurized. It is to be noted that the laws focus on sentencing the woman who is opting for the surgery. Thus, this is, in fact, a propellant to reduce female foeticide. //2)Female infanticide//This does not help your case in any way. If female feticide increases, female infanticide decreases and vice versa. The point being that the girl is being killed, only the time frame is different. //3) Proper care//This is entirely speculation. The parents might grow to love the child too. The assumption in the argument reverberates the common mentality of demonizing those who opt for SSA. I am not arguing that there may not be such people, but the proportion is likely to be very low. Because once the child is born, only those that are okay with being wrong or being a ‘bad parent’ are going to intentionally malnourish his/ her child. //4) Ethical Perspective //Freedom of choice is a good principle, but like any other freedom, it has some duties attached to the right. It should not be practiced if it causes harm to anyone, and in this case- it is harming the unborn child, it is harming the status of women by furthering their oppression. It is also harming the society as a whole by causing demographic instability, and by setting poor cultural examples. Let us look at the effects of an imbalanced sex ratio://1)Reduction in poverty// Ummm… You are assuming that the men will be okay with having no children. Maybe, but they won’t be okay with having no sex. This is against the basic human principle. In fact, this is going to worsen the situation, since there will be an increase in female trafficking, rape cases will increase. . http://tinyurl.com... There will be more illegitimate children with no one to care for them, except a single mom causing increased dependency. And lower stability. This is certainly not Okay. //2)Stabilization of population// Extending the previous argument, maybe the traditional families would decrease, but we cannot ignore the desperation of poor male members unable to find themselves a bride. Increase in heinous crimes is just going to break down the traditional marriages, leading to polygamy. Increase in sexual crimes against women. The population growth may decrease, but the increase in illegitimate children is going to be a major problem. We need to find a better, a sustainable way to decrease population growth. //3)Improvement in the status of women:// Not really. For women, the deficit situation may not improve their status at all, despite what a rudimentary economic model would have us believe. Scarcity of women would not enhance their position in society, due to the simultaneous increase in pressure to marry, higher risk of gender-based violence, rising demand for sex work and the development of trafficking networks. Moreover, their reduced demographic share in democratic regimes would translate into a weaker political voice in public decision-making, a trend that could be reinforced by women’s lessened involvement in non-domestic activities, such as outside employment and civil life. . http://tinyurl.com...