M A I N   N E W S

A Tribune Special
Killing the unborn daughter — III 
PNDT Act proves ineffective against female foeticide
Gayatri Rajwade
Tribune News Service

Chandigarh, September 15
It is more than a decade since the Prenatal Diagnostic Techniques (Regulation and Prevention of Misuse) Act 1994 came into being but it was only this year, on March 28, that a doctor was sentenced to two years in prison for violating the Act in Palwal, Haryana.

It is obvious that the system has failed to protect the unborn daughter.

In Punjab, of the seven cases that went to court, only three convictions occurred while the rest of the cases were discharged. And none of these convictions amounted to a severe and deterrent punishment.

The action taken against 194 ultrasound or imaging centres, clinics and hospitals across the state in the form of suspension/cancellation of registrations too has been almost ineffective. In many places they were back in business within no time.

Clearly the existing strategies are not working. The challenge is formidable as the crime involves not just the doctor who conducts the test but the pregnant woman, the person who carries out the abortion and in most cases the entire household of the pregnant woman who coerced her into it.

According to Veena Kumari, a member of the National Support and Monitoring Cell for the PNDT Act, “Some medical professionals and institutions are exploiting the mindset of the people. What we need is more legal convictions. Since the ‘crime’ takes place behind closed doors and people do not come forward to speak against it, convictions are difficult”.

Under the PNDT Act, violators can be punished with imprisonment for three years and a fine of Rs 10,000. In any subsequent conviction, the imprisonment could increase to five years and the fine to Rs 50,000. Even the pregnant woman is liable to be punished if she is not able to prove that she was forced to go in for sex-determination or abortion.

Sushama Rath, Under-Secretary at the PNDT Cell, Union Ministry of Health and Family Welfare in New Delhi, believes the problem of conviction arises because there are no complainants.

“This is due to the collusion between the parties (the woman getting an abortion or sex-determination done and the doctor doing it). Also, at the end of the day the chief medical officers in the states are to take action but they tend to take a lenient view towards their own fraternity”, says the official.

The only way to go around this is to send in decoy customers—sting operations Sushama Rath insists. “This makes people aware and frightens the doctors too.”

But that is just one aspect. There is also fear in peoples’ minds that in case they do agree to come forward and speak, the connivance between the doctors and authorities will get them into trouble.

While agreeing that this collusion does exist, Deputy Commissioner of Fatehgarh Sahib Jaspreet Talwar insists not everyone is corrupt. “The law needs to be made strict and the government needs to focus on what needs to be tackled collectively, on a priority basis,” she elucidates.

There are 1300 ultrasound/imaging/genetic centres registered in Punjab. However, records in many of these centres are incomplete or are not maintained properly. After all, if a centre is doing sex-determination tests or abortions they are not likely to document it.

So in order to go around the issue, it is necessary to bring in a system of checks on the paperwork, says Veena. “Forms which are filled in by such clinics for maintenance of record in respect of pregnant women should be submitted with the detailed information required in duplicate to the concerned medical officers in the states who should check them and if they are required by any NGOs, they should be made available to them.”

In fact, this is one of the directives that are sought in a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by the Voluntary Health Association of Punjab in the Supreme Court to help bolster the implementation of the Act.

“In cases related to the PNDT Act, FIRs do not work. The cases have to be filed by the ‘appropriate authorities’ appointed at the state level,” explains Veena. But in many instances, she says, the AAs themselves are not clearly aware of the provisions of the Act. Nor do they follow cases on a regular basis.

There is no easy solution especially since people come to these centres “voluntarily” says a gynaecologist in Patiala who does not wish to be named. “A woman comes to us pleading that she already has daughters and does not want another because there is too much family pressure on her. If we do not help her, someone else will or she will go in for a drastic option which may prove fatal for her. What do you suggest we do, turn the woman away?”

To be continued