In a rapid turn of events, the Chief Justice of India, DY Chandrachud, has ordered a review of a recent Supreme Court decision that permitted the medical termination of a pregnancy at 26 weeks. The decision came in response to the government’s concerns about the viability of the unborn child and the ethical complexities surrounding the case. A recall application has been requested by the Centre, which is set to be listed for hearing on Wednesday.
The Supreme Court had initially faced the challenging task of balancing the rights and welfare of an unborn child with the pleas of the expectant mother, who argued that she was unfit to raise the child due to various health issues and postnatal depression.
The heart of the dilemma lies in the assessment of the fetus’s viability. A medical board established by the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) reported that the unborn baby exhibited signs of viability, which means it had a strong possibility of survival if born. The AIIMS panel sought guidance from the Supreme Court on whether a feticide (the cessation of fetal heartbeat) could be performed before terminating the 26-week-old pregnancy.
Typically, feticide is considered in cases of abnormal fetal development but is not performed on a normally developing fetus. The AIIMS panel emphasized that failing to perform feticide would transform the procedure from termination to preterm delivery, necessitating intensive care for the baby. Preterm birth carries a higher risk of physical and mental disabilities.
Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati raised a critical point, asserting that the AIIMS report contradicted the previous judgment. She argued that if the fetus were to be born alive, the termination would amount to murder rather than abortion.
Recognizing the gravity of the situation, the Chief Justice of India directed the formation of a bench to address the matter promptly.
In the previous judgment, a bench comprising Justice Hima Kohli and Justice BV Nagarathna had granted the petitioner’s request for abortion. The petitioner, a mother of two children, cited her ongoing health issues, financial constraints, and emotional distress as reasons for seeking termination. She also highlighted the medical report’s assertion that pregnancy should not have occurred during her Lateral Amenorrhea phase.
The AIIMS panel’s recommendation emphasized the need for a directive on whether the parents would consider raising the child, given the potential physical, emotional, and financial toll it could entail. Additionally, if the couple opted for adoption, a clear process should be established to ensure the baby’s future well-being.
Under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) Act, termination is permitted up to 24 weeks for married women and for special categories, including survivors of rape, differently-abled women, and minors. However, this case has raised complex questions about the boundaries of the law and the ethical considerations surrounding late-term abortions.
Sources By Agencies