I’m sure that the abortion would have been done without any difficulty if the same defect was detected at 19 weeks of pregnancy. So why not abortion to be done if the same defect was detected at 21 or 22 or 23 or 24 weeks or later ? (Evidence: FOGSI has given a written statement that the risks to the mother are not increased at 24 weeks of pregnancy). RCOG clearly says that IT’S SOLELY THE WOMAN WHO DECIDES about whether she needs to go for abortion or not. Even if she is minor, she can take a decision. She need not take permission from her partner also. So my opinion is that IT’S BETTER (in all aspects) FOR Mrs.Niketa to UNDERGO ABORTION NOW. I feel that anybody who is against the abortion in this situation might not have come across the AGONY of parents and the difficulties that the baby has to face from the 1st day of its birth to till the end of its life. (We all know how difficult is to live in the present world even with all normal organs). (It’s not just fix the pacemaker and all problems are over). I presume that the judgement would have been different if the sitting Judge had a baby born with this or any other abnormality and faced the problems of it. The Honourable High Court would have taken opinions form FOGSI (Federation of Obsterics and Gynaecologists of India, which is the highest body in India), RCOG (Royal College of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, UK) and Ameriacan College of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, USA). I appeal to FOGSI that it should take up this iss
