Out-of-box measure to curb female foeticide

Rajendra P Jindal

IN the last couple of decades, there has been a spate of essays in the newspapers and magazines, debates on television, seminars and workshops on the subject of female foeticide. Without a single exception, they have all taken you through a maze of statistics to show that the ratio of female versus male births is falling and there should be a stronger legislation to stop the practice. The first fact you always knew, even without the jugglery of confusing figures. Regarding the need for a law with more teeth, nobody tells you if and how any legislation can be implemented. 

Notwithstanding the hullabaloo, the worsening sex ratio, projected by the alarmists as a dreadful situation, is nothing to panic about. It is not likely to create any social problem in the foreseeable future. Two consecutive generations of young men lost their lives in two successive world wars in Europe, especially in the UK, Germany, France, Italy; the erstwhile USSR and to a lesser extent in the US. These countries did not have to face polygamy. If fewer girls are born in India in the next couple of decades, it may actually prove a blessing in disguise. If finding a bride becomes difficult, so much so that polyandry becomes a threat, society might learn to value the girl child.

The ideal goal of complete abolition of this practice cannot be achieved within the present social framework. One cannot wish away the importance of a son in all ranks of our society. As of now, the poorest of the poor and richest of the rich; totally illiterate and highly educated; lowly clerks and company executives; nurses and doctors — all go in for the prenatal sex determination of their second or third child. The only exceptions are those for whom contraception is a luxury and every child, irrespective of its sex, a source of income. A miniscule exception is of those for whom two daughters are a perfectly good family. 

You cannot always fight evil with good intentions alone. There is no way to implement any legislation in a society, compulsively obsessed with having a male child. The state or judiciary, by adopting draconian measures, only encourage corrupt and harmful practices. The Supreme Court passed an order to plug the loopholes in the Prenatal Diagnostic Techniques Act (1996). For many politicians, social activists and NGOs, it is a symbol of social consciousness to align with this cause. The state governments have been jolted out of slumber and the district medical offices (chief medical officers or civil surgeons) are busy conducting raids on sex-determination centres. These knee-jerk and hypocritical measures adopted by the authorities have resulted in corruption and a predictable mess. A multibillion-rupee industry has gone underground. Earlier, pregnant mothers went to doctors for prenatal sex determination without any misgivings or stigma. The doctors offered their services openly and at competitive prices, gave their reports in writing and could be sued in consumer courts in case they were negligent. Now this service has to be procured in the black market. The doctor gives his report only orally and charges exorbitantly to meet increased overhead expenses. Since the doctor need not give his report in writing, many unscrupulous, unqualified doctors have entered the profession. Consequently, the percentage of wrong reports and the number of abortions have  increased. 

In some cases, a male foetus which was wrongly reported as female is aborted. Obtaining an abortion has become a cognisable offence. The government itself, which until a little time back had made it as easy to obtain an abortion (as a population-control measure) finds itself in a quandary. Abortion clinics have gone underground. A large number of these abortions are conducted by midwifes (dais) in unhygienic conditions, resulting in complications and maternal mortality. An “inspector raj” prevails and the scale of malpractices that have ensued is difficult to imagine. A simple test of the success of the measures taken so far to prevent female foeticide is to review the birth register of some hospitals at random to see the number of second and third daughters born. As I have found, the results confirm the status quo.

What is the remedy? Social activists and feminists tell us that the panacea  lies in bringing about a change in social thinking and making the girl child as welcome as  a boy (e.g. “Beti Bachao” etc). This is wishful thinking of an armchair activist. If all of us work diligently, we might succeed in changing social thinking in a century or so. The answer lies in finding a more pragmatic, socially acceptable measure. To start a debate, I am putting forth an idea. (A passing reference to it has been made by Edward de Bono in one of his books in a different context).

The government can pass legislation to make a "one-son" (not one- child) family a norm. This means that a couple is allowed to have children as long as they don't have a son and then no more. Thus many couples will have their first child as a son and will have no more children. On the other hand, many couples will go on having any number of daughters until they have a son. On the face of it, this will lead to the production of a disproportionately large number of girls which may ultimately lead to polygamy and many other problems. Nothing of the sort will happen. 

As any human biology student will tell you, one of the astonishing laws of nature is that in humans (and all other sexually producing species), a nearly equal number of male and females babies are born except under some rare conditions such as after a major war. Therefore, for each family with two or more daughters, there will be many more families with one son. On an average, every family will have only two children who will replace their parents. In the end, it will bring about a complete halt in the population growth. The measure will satisfy the vast majority of the population obsessed with the idea of having a son. Those who have the first child as a son can adopt a female child if they are keen to have a daughter. The state will save a lot of money which is now spent on family planning and sex-determination measures. The same money can be given to parents who have two or more daughters and can be used for their education and marriage. There is nothing very radical about this idea. After initial misgivings, it can become acceptable. There can be valid difficulties in its application but it can serve as a template which can be modified and make prenatal sex determination unnecessary. Female foeticide will stop and that is the aim.

The writer is a surgeon at Guru Gobind Singh Medical College and Hospital, Faridkot.