Skip to main content

Medical Termination of Pregnancy

 Introduction

The Medical Termination of Pregnancy (Amendment) Act, 2021 alters the Medical Termination Pregnancy Act, 1971.To know what is the new amendment and what was the need for an amendment, we must look at the previous Medical Termination Pregnancy Act,1971.

Medical termination of pregnancy Act, 1971

Before 1971, it was illegal to abort a child under section 45 of the Indian Penal Code. Thus there was a need to enact a law which can regulate abortions in India. In 1971, The Medical termination of Pregnancy Act legalized abortion in India. 

                 Section 3(2)(a) states that, “A pregnancy may be terminated by a registered medical practitioner, where the length of the pregnancy does not exceed 12 weeks.” 

                Section 3(2)(b) states that, “A pregnancy may be terminated by two registered medical practitioner where the length of the pregnancy exceeds 12 weeks but does not exceeds 20 weeks.” However, this required 2medical registered practitioners. This pregnancy can be terminated if registered medical practitioners is of opinion that-

  • The continuance of the pregnancy would involve a risk to the life of the pregnant woman or of grave injury to her physical or mental health.

  • There is a substantial risk that if the child were born, it would suffer from such physical or medical abnormalities as to be serious handicapped.

Under this Act, if a pregnant woman is below the age of 18 years, then, to terminate her pregnancy, the consent of her parents/guardians must be taken. Also if a pregnant woman is above the age of 18 years, then her consent is must for terminating her pregnancy. 

Only a hospital established or maintained by government, or a place for the time being approved for the purpose of this act by the government, is allowed to terminate pregnancy. If termination happens elsewhere, it is illegal. Exceptions to these are that if any time during the pregnancy, a doctor can terminate the pregnancy of a woman if it is immediately necessary to save the life of the pregnant woman. 

Concerns over the Medical termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971

This 50 year old act does not cope up with the new generation. In India, according to some reports, approximately, 80% of abortions that occur in India are outside health facilities. Unsafe abortions are the 3rd leading cause of maternal deaths in India. On a daily basis, 10 to 13 women die due to unsafe abortions. 

              Many women were approaching the court to seek approval for abortions over 20 weeks. Most of these pleas are due to fetal anomalies that are detected late and in cases of sexual assault, rape of minors in particularly. In many fetal anomalies can be detected after 20 weeks. There was ambiguity around the provisions in the act for unmarried women to terminate pregnancy due to contraceptive failure. There was a considered amount of stigma attached to having a non-marital pregnancy or birth. For pregnancy above 12 weeks, the consent of 2 week registered medical practitioners was required. This was challenging in rural areas where even 1 practitioner is difficult to find.

Medical Termination of Pregnancy Amendment Act of 2021

Thus, the Delhi High Court has allowed the medical termination of pregnancy of a woman who had completed 22 weeks of gestation as the fetus was suffering from multiple abnormalities. Now, pregnancy up to 20 weeks can be terminated with advice of one registered medical petitioner and termination of pregnancy up to 24 weeks can take place with the advice of two registered medical practitioners. The amendment also allows unmarried women to terminate a pregnancy. The act says that a pregnancy may be terminated up to 20 weeks in case of failure of contraceptive method or device. The act says that all the States and Union Territories will constitute a Medical Board which will decide if a pregnancy may be terminated after 24 weeks due to significant fetal abnormalities. This implies that there is no change provision for terminating pregnancies due to rape that have crossed 24 weeks limit. The old resource that is to file a writ would still be there for such cases.

                 The biggest loophole of this new amendment is that there is no time frame for medical board’s decision within which the board must make its decision. Thus, it can happen that the baby is already out before the medical board pronounces any decision. 

              The registered medical practitioners cannot reveal the details of a woman whose pregnancy has been terminated. A person authorized by law is an exception. The violator will be punished with imprisonment up to a year, a fine or both. 

          The amendment, however, does not make it clear whether the transgender persons would be covered under this bill or not. 

Conclusion

It is commendable that the Central Government has taken such a bold stand while balancing the diverse cultures, traditions and schools of thought that our country maintains, however the amendment still leaves women with various conditionalities, which in many cases become an impediment in access to safe abortion.

 
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske
1 comment
Read more

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree
Post a Comment
Read more