Indian authorities investigate extraordinary story of sex-selective abortion
by Michael Cook | 28 Jul 2019 |
_640_369_c1_c_c.jpg)
Authorities are investigating a possible epidemic of sex-selective abortions in Uttarkashi, a province in the remote northern Indian state of Uttarakhand state. Alarm bells went off after figures in a government database showed that none of the 216 children born across 132 villages over three months were girls.
Since 1994, sex-selective abortion of girls has been outlawed, but the practice continues. In 2013, the UN reported that 919 girls were born for every 1000 boys; in 2017, a government survey put that figure at 896. Last year an Indian government report found about 63 million women were "missing" from the country's population due to a preference for boys.
Officials in Uttarakhand said that legal action would be taken against families or medical professionals involved in illegal abortions.
It is quite possible that there simply has been a huge mistake in recording statistics. The villages in the district are small and remote and there are few doctors with ultrasound machines for checking the sex before birth. The district magistrate, told The Times of India: “The reality of the data will soon get crystal-clear within some days. We are getting a ground survey done in order to improve the girl child sex ratio in every village of the district and to eradicate any illegal practice.”
Michael Cook is editor of BioEdge
What's in a name? Does it make a difference if (by way of example) the widespread abortion of unborn children with Down syndrome is called "eugenics"? A number of bioethicists deny that it is, even though the rates of termination reach 90% if a diagnosis is made before birth. From their point of view, "eugenics" is a word reserved for Nazi atrocities. The destruction of children with Down syndrome is not being carried out by Nazis, ergo, it is not eugenics.
A number of bioethicists writing from a disability perspective disagree. We have presented some of their arguments in a special issue of the Journal of Policy and Practice in Intellectual Disabilities. They have a refreshingly different opinion on this contentious topic.
A number of bioethicists writing from a disability perspective disagree. We have presented some of their arguments in a special issue of the Journal of Policy and Practice in Intellectual Disabilities. They have a refreshingly different opinion on this contentious topic.
 Michael Cook Editor BioEdge |  |  |  |
NEWS THIS WEEK
by Michael Cook | Jul 28, 2019
Yes, say experts in disability care by Michael Cook | Jul 28, 2019
Very little has been written by Michael Cook | Jul 28, 2019
Some freed provided that they raise children as their own by Michael Cook | Jul 28, 2019
Identity of patient kept secret by Michael Cook | Jul 28, 2019
Despite the headlines, it could be a statistical glitch by Michael Cook | Jul 28, 2019
Scottish study shows that 1 in 6 will conceive without artificial means by Xavier Symons | Jul 28, 2019
The researchers want to start trials on humans next year BioEdge
Level 1, 488 Botany Road, Alexandria NSW 2015 Australia
Phone: +61 2 8005 8605
Mobile: 0422-691-615
.png)
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario