Thanks for writing in. You brought up 2 points in your comment, one about "selfishness" and one about "the greater good." If you don't mind, I would like to address only the 2nd point in this topic. The debate on selfishness is a whole another topic which I promise to post next week (btw I think my signature is somewhat reflective of what I think about selfishness/unselfishness). But getting back to the "greater good" point.Looking at the current situation, Indira is willing to forgo her daughter's safety in order to get Rajrani arrested and save the many girls that may potentially have been jeopordized if Rajrani stays in power. For you, this is acting in the greater good (correct me if I'm misunderstanding or misrepresenting your viewpoint).But this is my point, how do we know that if we save Indu now that she actually won't grow up to save millions and by denying her this chance, we are really not acting in the greater good. If saving 15 lives is better than saving 1, then surely saving millions (which is what indu may do if she is given the opportunity) is better than saving 15? Is the greater good just defined by numbers? 15 is better than 1 and 100 is better than 15? I don't know the answer to this but I surely don't appreciate the fact that people (by this I mean the writers and Indira's character) like to believe that they do and somehow pretend that their approach to sacrifice 1 for the many is "better" or more "just" than the person who wants to save 1 life who is in immediate danger at this time, when the rest could be saved thru many other means.