Once again, the Supreme Court of India has made it clear that a woman has the power to make decisions about herself and her body, and should have full control over her reproductive choices. The court ruled out the option of making the girl remain pregnant against her will.
AIIMS wanted the court to allow the pregnancy to proceed because it was against the interests of the baby, but the court refused. The court pointed out that this is an instance of rape of a minor and that she would suffer the consequences of her experience all her life.
It is suggested by the Supreme Court that the central government consider amending the law to allow abortions beyond 20 weeks of pregnancy in cases of rape, with no deadlines whatsoever. The law should be flexible and adaptable to changing times. Furthermore, the law should be amended to ensure that such cases are completed within a week. Why should the girl have to endure the mental stress of the trial?
The bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi also expressed displeasure over AIIMS filing a curative petition against the Supreme Court's order to terminate a minor's 30-week pregnancy, stating that the principle of medical professionals' specialized knowledge cannot override the will of the people. Doctors cannot make decisions for patients. Even judges must act according to established procedures.
The court stated that decision-making is a citizen's right. AIIMS cannot make decisions on their behalf. We must respect the individual's wishes. The court stated that this is a battle between the fetus and the child. You are talking about the unborn child but are not considering the child who has suffered so much. The child should have a dignified life under all circumstances. You should think about her family.
The court made emotional remarks about the minor girl, stating that this is a case of child rape. She is still a child herself and should not be forced to become a mother. The bench stated that if she is denied an abortion, the victim will suffer lifelong trauma and deep scars.
The court clearly stated that if the mother is not at risk of permanent disability, abortion should be performed. An unwanted pregnancy should not be forced upon anyone. The bench stated, "Just consider, she is still a child and should pursue further education, but we are bent on making her a mother. We should think about the pain she has endured."
The court made these comments when ASG Aishwarya Bhati, mentioning the curative petition filed by AIIMS, cited difficulties in abortion and requested the court to withdraw the abortion order. Bhati stated that the pregnancy is 30 weeks old, the fetus is well-developed and viable, and that premature birth would result in permanent disability. One such child has been at AIIMS for a year and is unavailable for adoption.
Bhati stated that the pregnancy should continue for only four weeks, after which the child will be born comfortably. The child will survive, and the mother will not be at risk. Aborting the pregnancy now could cause lifelong health problems for the child. Bhati requested permission from the court to speak with the minor and her parents about this matter, and counsel them, and then AIIMS will inform the court.
The court stated that the child is in AIIMS, so who is preventing her and her parents from counseling? However, the decision to abort the pregnancy should be the child's and her parents'. AIIMS can help them make an informed decision, but let them make the decision. The court stated that the reproductive autonomy of the pregnant mother should be given paramount importance. The court directed AIIMS to withdraw its curative petition and not insist on it. AIIMS should not return to the court. The parents may return.
Earlier, on Wednesday, April 29th, the court dismissed the review petition filed against AIIMS's abortion order and directed the court to comply with the order. After this, AIIMS hurriedly filed a curative petition this morning and once again requested the court to modify the order, to which the court did not agree.
Doctors from AIIMS also came to the court and presented their side but the court was not impressed. In this case, on April 24, the Supreme Court, declaring the reproductive autonomy and will of the woman as paramount, had given permission to terminate the seven-month-old unwanted pregnancy of the minor and had asked AIIMS to perform the abortion.
.jpg)
%20(3).jpg)
