Reproductive Choice of Women—Tale of Two Nations Revisited

Dear Sir, The May–June 2023 issue of your journal ran an editorial on the reproductive choices of the largest and the oldest democracy. It ends on an appropriate note "Let it stimulate the reader's thought" and mine has been stimulated and here is a response to the tale told. The tale compares the two nations with reference to safe motherhood and women's reproductive choice through the lens of enactment of their respective MTP Acts and their evolution. However, before patting ourselves on the back for stealing a march on the USA, we need to consider certain facts. First, the origin of this Act in the two nations was fundamentally different. While in India, the havoc created by illegal abortions led the state to implement the Act to safeguard motherhood, in the USA, it was the demand by women themselves to secure the autonomy of their reproductive rights that got the court to sanction it (Roe vs. Wade). This difference throws light on the extent of women's emancipation in the USA way back in the 1960s, whereas ours is still in process. A survey conducted in Madhya Pradesh in 2018 showed almost 62% of 500 women interviewed, believed abortion to be a sin,1 despite abortion being legalized almost 50 years back. Second, the robust federalism in the USA allowed 20 out of its 50 states to legally permit abortions in certain circumstances much before the Roe vs. Wade verdict.2 On the contrary in India, pre-1971 abortion was an offence punishable by law with imprisonment of 3 years for the provider and 7 years for the seeker.1 The 2022 reversal of the Roe vs. Wade judgment has shocked a majority of US women. Six out of 10 Americans feel that abortions should be legal.3 It appears that the political ideology of the rightist Republicans has guided this reversal. President Joe Biden called this judgment a "sad day for the court and for the country."4 In 2021, India made some commendable amendments to the MTP Act by extending the eligibility of MTP to 24 weeks and beyond under specific situations. Following the footsteps of the authors of this editorial, I too have certain questions for the readers. Will the cut-off for period of viability, which presently is 20 weeks, be changed to 24 weeks or more, to justify abortion, or will the definition of abortion be modified? What will be the fate of the baby, if born alive? Who will take charge of the preterm baby, if it survives? Earlier these contradictions are sorted; higher will be the validation of the new amendments. I am reminded of the famous lines of Robert Frost "… and miles to go before I sleep." Data availability statement (recommended if applicable) Nil. Author contribution Single author – Conceptualisation, drafting, corresponding. Financial support and sponsorship Nil. Conflicts of interest There are no conflicts of interest.