Here's the story that has started a few debates on abortion. Niketa Mehta was in the 24th week of pregnancy when her gynec discovered serious defect in the foetus and recommended abortion. The alternative was a seriously handicapped baby with a drastically reduced quality of life. Naturally the Mehtas were worried. MTP after 20 weeks is illegal in India unless the life of the mother is at risk. The Mehtas decided to challenge the law. The High Court, after conducting many studies and tests ruled against them saying that the risk to the baby isn't as serious as stated earlier. The question is: why shouldn't abortion be allowed in such cases?
Abortion, euthanesia..these are all such grey areas, ethically speaking. If abortion can be allowed upto 20 weeks, why not beyond it? Everyone has a right to live, whether a 20 week old foetus or a 26 week old one. Right from the moment the sperm fertilizes the egg and a zygote if formed, it is life. One cell, million cells, what does it matter? So why is it ok to abort a less than 20 week old foetus and not one over it? The law should be equal towards all.
Abortion beyond 20 weeks is allowed when the mother's life is in danger. But regardless of how seriously defective a foetus is, aborting it after 20 weeks is illegal. Is it really ethical to give birth to a baby, knowing that it will never have a normal life?Every parent wants his/her child to grow up healthy. Who would want to see their kid on pacemaker and life support from the moment of birth, dependant on them for everything? What would happen to the child when the parents are gone? Who will look after them? Is it ethical to condemn a child to a 'vegetable' existence?
The law does not recognise the unborn child as an individual with individual rights. The murderer of a pregnant woman is not sentenced for double murder. In case of accidents, the compensation does not cover the unborn child. Why?
In the end, I believe only the mother has the right to decide whether to abort a child or not. It isn't an easy decision.
Abortion, euthanesia..these are all such grey areas, ethically speaking. If abortion can be allowed upto 20 weeks, why not beyond it? Everyone has a right to live, whether a 20 week old foetus or a 26 week old one. Right from the moment the sperm fertilizes the egg and a zygote if formed, it is life. One cell, million cells, what does it matter? So why is it ok to abort a less than 20 week old foetus and not one over it? The law should be equal towards all.
Abortion beyond 20 weeks is allowed when the mother's life is in danger. But regardless of how seriously defective a foetus is, aborting it after 20 weeks is illegal. Is it really ethical to give birth to a baby, knowing that it will never have a normal life?Every parent wants his/her child to grow up healthy. Who would want to see their kid on pacemaker and life support from the moment of birth, dependant on them for everything? What would happen to the child when the parents are gone? Who will look after them? Is it ethical to condemn a child to a 'vegetable' existence?
The law does not recognise the unborn child as an individual with individual rights. The murderer of a pregnant woman is not sentenced for double murder. In case of accidents, the compensation does not cover the unborn child. Why?
In the end, I believe only the mother has the right to decide whether to abort a child or not. It isn't an easy decision.
- Mood:
gloomy
Profile
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif)
an_orange_cat- an_orange_cat
Syndicate
