PDF, 3rd August 2016
Recently, in a case before the Supreme Court, a woman successfully obtained direction for
medical termination of pregnancy (abortion) after 24 weeks on a plea that she was raped by her
boyfriend on the false promise of marriage. In another case, the Delhi High Court
intervened directing medical examination for fitness for abortion responding to the poignant tale
of a 16-year-old kidnapped by unknown persons, sexually abused by them for two years, and
finally found abandoned near the Delhi University campus. The orders in both cases were
beyond the permissible (मु ना सब) period in the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act (MTP
Act). There is an outcry for change in law for easy availability of the option to abort without
court intervention. Does it discard patient autonomy ( वरा य) and impose unnecessary
restrictions? Can a woman have the right to seek abortion at any time she pleases? Should the
state have a say in an intimate matter of what a woman wants to do with the foetus?
In India, the transition from a regime of proscription against abortion by treating it as a criminal
offence liable for punishment under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) to legitimising the practice as a
health and family planning measure through the enactment ( नयम) of the MTP Act of 1971 had
been fairly easy, unlike in the West, where the movement towards legalising abortion has been
tumultuous involving major heated public debates.
According to the IPC the offence falls under ‘Offences Affecting the Human Body’, and
provides that causing a miscarriage with or without consent for a purpose other than saving the
life of the woman is punishable. The MTP Act makes for a quantum difference in approach, as if
by a legislative sleight through a non-obstante clause, by decriminalising abortion without
bringing an amendment (संशोधन) to the IPC or abrogating the penal provisions. The MTP Act
sets some limitations regarding the circumstances when abortion is permissible, the persons who
are competent to perform the procedure, and the place where it could be performed. Outside the
ring of protection that the Act draws, the IPC still operates.
It is common knowledge that abortion is possible within 12 weeks at the option of the pregnant
woman and within an extended period of 20 weeks with the permission of a Medical Board
consisting of not less than two persons. In both cases, the freedom of choice of a woman is
limited to a situation when (i) continuance of the pregnancy would involve a risk to the life of the
pregnant woman, or of grave (गंभीर) injury to physical or mental health that includes rape; or (ii)
there is a substantial (मजबू त) risk that if the child were born, it would suffer from such physical
or mental abnormalities as to be seriously handicapped. But the latter limitation does not apply to
the termination of pregnancy by a registered medical practitioner in case he is of the opinion,
formed in good faith, that it is immediately necessary to save the life of the pregnant woman.
Most foetal abnormalities are said to be capable of being detected around 20 weeks and a law
that allows for abortion in the second situation mentioned above therefore caps the limit to that
period. There are strong ethical (नी तपरक) objections to the idea of abortion per se as well as to
aborting a child with disability.
The MTP Act does not address any ethical issues, but in legal regimes (शासन) that do not allow
abortions, the moral standpoint is that medical termination of pregnancy results in the death of a
living being. The fundamental question is: what makes killing a human being wrong? We may
then consider whether these characteristics, whatever they might be, apply to the earliest stages
of human life in the womb. Explanations that have roots in religion include the traditional
Christian doctrines such as that all humans are made in the image of God or that all humans have
an immortal soul. In Roe v. Wade (1973), the U.S. Supreme Court decided by a 7-2 majority that
an implied (उपल
त) constitutional right to privacy, whether based on the Fourteenth
Amendment’s concept of personal liberty or in the Ninth Amendment’s reservation of rights to
the people, was sufficiently broad to encompass a woman’s right to terminate her pregnancy —
but it again set limitation for States to declare the outer limit to carry out the procedure
(कायप त).
1. Permissible (Adj.) मु ना सब / जायज

Synonyms : Acceptable / Lawful / Legit / Licit

Antonyms : Illegal / Unlawful / Unsuitable
2. Autonomy (N)
वरा य /
वाय तता

Synonyms : Freedom / Self-rule / Liberty

Antonyms : Dependence
3. Enactment (N) नयम / कानू न

Synonyms : Depiction / Portrayal / Execution

Antonyms : Failure / Block / Hindrance / Veto
4. Amendment (N) संशोधन / सु धार

Synonyms : Change / Remedy / Reform / Correction

Antonyms : Damage / Hurt / Injury
5. Grave (Adj.) गंभीर / बड़ा

Synonyms : Sage / Dour / Dull / Sedate / Quiet

Antonyms : Agitated / Funny / Light
6. Substantial (Adj.) मजबू त / भौ तक
 Synonyms : Big / Vast / Hefty / Bulky / Tidy

Antonyms : Broken / Tiny / Soft / Poor
7. Ethical (Adj.) नी तपरक

Synonyms : Moral / Honest / Humane / Straight

Antonyms : Corrupt / Unjust / Immoral
8. Regime (N) शासन / हु कूमत

Synonyms : Honest / Clean / Decent / Noble

Antonyms : Corrupt / Unjust / Improper
9. Implied (Adj.) उपल
त

Synonyms : Hidden / Allusive / unsaid

Antonyms : Explicit / Stated / Open
10. Procedure (N) कायप त / काय णाल

Synonyms : Action / Grind / Style / Strategy

Antonyms : Idleness / inaction / Ignorance
Daily current affairs Quiz
GK Quiz
English Quiz
Aptitude Quiz
Reasoning Quiz
Computer Quiz
Banking Quiz
Marketing Quiz
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
http://currentaffairs.wifistudy.com/
http://gk.wifistudy.com/
http://english.wifistudy.com/
http://aptitude.wifistudy.com/
http://reasoning.wifistudy.com/
http://computer.wifistudy.com/
http://bankingawareness.wifistudy.com/
http://marketing.wifistudy.com/