A 27-year-old lady was given permission by the Delhi High Court to terminate her 22-week baby because she believed that carrying out her pregnancy would endanger her mental health.
In light of the prevalent social stigmas, the court stated that the pregnancy, which resulted from a short-lived live-in relationship, was further complicating her circumstances. According to Justice Sanjeev Narula’s bench, the woman’s situation presented a strong argument for an unintended pregnancy that resulted from very difficult conditions that caused great grief and hardship.
In an order dated August 16 and made public on, the court stated, “The court is of the opinion that the petitioner’s continuation of the ongoing pregnancy poses a risk to her mental well-being considering the reasonably foreseeable environment for both the petitioner and the unborn child.”
The woman in question had married in 2016 and gave birth to a girl in 2017, but her husband abandoned her and their daughter, and his whereabouts are not known to her. She later started living with another man, and her petition before the court stated that her fresh pregnancy was unwanted as it had arisen from a live-in relationship.
In her petition, the woman stated that she had not realised her ongoing pregnancy till such a belated stage due to health concerns, which led to an irregular menstrual cycle. Once she became aware of the pregnancy, she went to various doctors and clinics seeking medical termination, which was denied by all doctors on the grounds of limitations under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) Act.
Under the Act, women can legally undergo abortions till 20 weeks of pregnancy following the opinion of a registered medical practitioner, and up to 24 weeks for certain women defined under MTP Rules. Rule 3B(2) of MTP allows a woman to terminate her pregnancy between 20 and 24 weeks on account of a change in marital status through widowhood or divorce, mental anguish, rape, assault, and health complications, among other reasons.
The woman’s petition added that she was not able to raise and nurture a second child as she was already raising her seven-year-old daughter on her own with financial hardships and difficulties.
Taking note of the woman’s condition, the high court on August 13 had directed the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) to constitute a medical board and examine her condition. In its report, AIIMS had stated that though no congenital anomalies were detected in the foetus, there was no indication of any determination of the woman’s actual, foreseeable environment or the impact of her particular situation on her mental health.
In the order, justice Narula observed that the AIIMS medical opinion could not be considered as a comprehensive or a complete assessment of the woman’s health in terms of her foreseeable environment.
“The petitioner has made it clear that she is already struggling to financially take care of her first child, even working multiple jobs to sustain her child and herself. As such, the reasonably foreseeable environment of the petitioner should have been factored in by the medical board in their opinion of the physical and mental health of the petitioner,” the court maintained.
While granting the woman liberty to undergo the termination at a medical facility of her own choice, the court in its 13-page order also dealt with the fundamental right to personal liberty encompassing the right to make reproductive choices, including termination of pregnancy under conditions that pose a risk to the health.
“The Supreme Court of India has affirmed these rights, emphasizing the importance of considering the woman’s current health, her life conditions and her future well-being while making such decisions. Therefore, it is clear that a pregnant woman’s bodily autonomy and right of self-determination is an intrinsic part of her fundamental rights enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution,” the court said.
Get the latest news updates and stay informed with FELA NEWS!
Source: HT
