Increasing the permissible duration of pregnancy for MTP-good or bad?

Page

Suspended

Posted: 11 years ago

According to the MTP Act, 1971, at present, a woman is allowed to terminate her pregnancy within a period of 20 weeks if the foetus is found to have abnormalities threatening her or the baby.

A woman ,more than 20-weeks-pregnanat petitioned in the Bombay high court to be allowed to terminate the pregnancy. The unborn child was found to have life-threatening heart anomalies.

Should the period for MTP be increased from 20 weeks to more than 24 weeks?

Quote

Frequent Posters

Angel-likeDevil

@Angel-likeDevil

Trailblazer

+ 3

Posted: 11 years ago

No no. For heart malformations, there are treatments, however life-threatening they may be. The ACTUAL imit is 12 weeks, but due to these 'anomalies' it was extended to 20 weeks. And the need for lowering the requirements for abortion below 20 weeks is to minimise the scope for female foeticide, although that is a different issue, and is banned under PCPNDT Act. I digress. So yeah, the termination of pregnancy must be decided by the doctor - practitioner, if the pregnancy will cause GRAAAVE injury to baby or the mother.

EDIT : Because the judiciary has decided so, then there must be a reason... anyways, I got to get more clarity on this issue. Sometimes, I feel every woman must have the right to determine whether she would want a baby with mal-formations...but, in the name of this, people might mis-use the law. That is what has happened, abortions still happen - unregistered practitioners do it for their own benefit, people still dump female babies in gutters - It's a very sensitive and complexx issue.. The legislation is fine and has clearly mentioned the pre-requisites before going in for termination, yet...there are issues like this, which leaves one confused, as it entails moral, ethical, societal aspects.

Edited by Angel-likeDevil - 11 years ago

Quote

Looks like you are new here. Register for free, learn and contribute.

373577

Suspended

Posted: 11 years ago

Agree completely with all you said except about this-

Originally posted by: Angel-likeDevil
The legislation is fine and has clearly mentioned the pre-requisites before going in for termination, yet...there are issues like this, which leaves one confused, as it entails moral, ethical, societal aspects.

If you go carefully over the MTP Act you will see that virtually anyone can request for an abortion anytime till 20 weeks. If the recommendation for increasing it to beyond 24 weeks also gets accepted it would take away even that restriction. There are also reports that besides the allopathic doctors - -- homeopaths, ayurvedic practitioners and nurses too will be permitted to conduct MTP. India must be having the most liberalised MTP law in the world.🤔

Quote

Angel-likeDevil

@Angel-likeDevil

Trailblazer

+ 3

Posted: 11 years ago

Originally posted by: zorrro

Agree completely with all you said except about this-

If you go carefully over the MTP Act you will see that virtually anyone can request for an abortion anytime till 20 weeks. If the recommendation for increasing it to beyond 24 weeks also gets accepted it would take away even that restriction. There are also reports that besides the allopathic doctors - -- homeopaths, ayurvedic practitioners and nurses too will be permitted to conduct MTP. India must be having the most liberalised MTP law in the world.🤔

@bold -- maybe, but not really. 😆 ..it's pretty tight and sensible enough.

Not anyone, although it happens in reality - in unregistered/unlicensed clinics.

I read the legislation long ago, as far as I remember the mother who wants to go for termination can do so at after getting a sort of attestation from a registered doctor or two(depening on the medical condition) and any violation brings punishment to the doctor - practitioner. So, no, doctors wouldnt do that. It's false that anyone can go for abortion...how can the very legislation allow it 😆

@red --- yeah, but that is illegal. In the legislation it's written as "registered medical practitioners"...but the very structure of healthcare system in India is so... porous that some people(practitioners) get away with their 'business'.. The government is taking measures to integrate all the local clinics so that such issues can come under it's scanner.

OK, I must go ...will come back edit this if I am reminded of something else.

Quote

373577

Suspended

Posted: 11 years ago

@ red- it is not a law yet but newspapers say it is being proposed .

Falure on contraceptives leading to pregnancy is considered a valid reason to undergo MTP. I think that makes it very easy for anyone to request an abortion. Doctors are prohibited from doing it for resons of gender discrimination if I am not wrong. I need to read up some.

Quote

return_to_hades

@return_to_hades

Stunner

+ 6

Posted: 11 years ago

I don't care for parasites. So 20-24-36 none of it matters to me. Less I speak on the issue, better though.

Quote

Angel-likeDevil

@Angel-likeDevil

Trailblazer

+ 3

Posted: 11 years ago

Originally posted by: return_to_hades

I don't care for parasites. So 20-24-36 none of it matters to me. Less I speak on the issue, better though.

I remember long ago reading your opinion on babies like 3 years ago i guess... RTH, please tell us(ME) your opnions, I even shared your opinions with my dad, like such-and-such person says that... can you please share again, not for a debate, yours was so original and makes one think actually. OK, before this post becomes my admiration for you... please! 😭

PS -- Dont ignore this! 😛 pleaase 😭

Quote

return_to_hades

@return_to_hades

Stunner

+ 6

Posted: 11 years ago

I'll try to keep it short. I don't think life begins at conception. A fetus is not life. At best it is probable life. Many bioethicists will argue over what point a fetus can be considered as human life. I view a fetus as a parasite.

It is a being that relies on the host (the mother) to sustain itself. Sometimes it drains the host of energy and nutrition resources as well as causes strain. A host has no obligation to sustain an unwanted parasite. If people care for the parasite so much, they can choose to host and sustain it themselves.

I hope you are not tricking me into a debate here...

Quote

Angel-likeDevil

@Angel-likeDevil

Trailblazer

+ 3

Posted: 11 years ago

Originally posted by: return_to_hades

I'll try to keep it short. I don't think life begins at conception. A fetus is not life. At best it is probable life. Many bioethicists will argue over what point a fetus can be considered as human life. I view a fetus as a parasite.

It is a being that relies on the host (the mother) to sustain itself. Sometimes it drains the host of energy and nutrition resources as well as causes strain. A host has no obligation to sustain an unwanted parasite. If people care for the parasite so much, they can choose to host and sustain it themselves.

I hope you are not tricking me into a debate here...

I dont like debating with anyone, sometimes I enjoy interacting for gaining clarity(personal benefit), I like reading different views, especially original ones :) ...we can really make our mind bend to think one way and many angles of viewing something looks to be true!

I actually somewhat forgot this POV, and I wanted to gain some clarity, and stalking YOUR posts on DM would be tedious effort 😆 so I just asked :)

Alright, if anyone comes to cross your opinions and begin a debate, I'll stop them OK? 😆