Social Scientist

Reproduction, Abortion and Women's Health

Author(s): Geetanjali Gangoli
Source: Social Scientist, Vol. 26, No. 11/12 (Nov. - Dec., 1998), pp. 83-105
Published by: Social Scientist
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3517661
Accessed: 08/11/2010 23:09

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=socialscien.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Social Scientist is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Social Scientist.

http://www.jstor.org
GEETANJALIGANGOLI*

Reproduction,Abortionand Women'sHealth*

The question of women's health seems to be cast in adjunct to

reproduction,at least as far as the Indianstate is concerned.For the
feminist movements in the city of Bombay, women's health are
inextricablyconnectedwith issuesaroundsexuality,reproductionand
the social and legal control of these. In fact, it has been stated in an
internalcritiquethat the need of feministsto discuss sexuality seems
to have emergedfrom debatesaroundfertilityand fertilitycontrol.'
One of the 'victories'of the health and the feministmovementsin
Bombaywas the campaignaroundselectivesex determination,using
the medical techniques of amniocentesis and ultra sound. The
campaignbegan in 1982, leadingto a law banningthese techniques
in 1988, making Maharashtrathe first state in the country to adopt
such a law. Other states followed suit and in 1992, a law was passed
at the national level, similarin spirit to the Bombaylaw.
In this paperI will explore some issues relatedto the campaignin
Bombay and the 1988 law. Connectedclosely to it, in my opinion,
are the national familyplanningprogramme,the feministcritiqueof
the methods and the ideology of the programme,legal and "moral"
dilemmasconnected with abortion and its implied and stated links
with sex determination.
I
THE POLITICS OF THE FAMILY PLANNING PROGRAMME
Indian feminists have pointed out that unlike in the West, where
women have had to struggleto get access to the most basic birth
control methods, in our country,the state uses force and coercion to
reducebirth rates. Indiawas the first country in the world to accept
family planning as a national programmeas is apparentin the first
and second five year plans.2

* Research
Scholar,Departmentof History,Delhi University,Delhi.

Social Scientist, Vol. 28, Nos. 11 -12 Nov. - Dec. 1998

84 SOCIALSCIENTIST

The first few five year plans focused in male sterlisation along
with contraceptivesfor women. However,from the late 1970's there
was a shift in focus to female contraceptives.The political defeat
sufferedby the CongressI in 1977 was attributedin the most part to
the excesses in the forces sterilisationson men between 1975-7, that
is, the yearsof the National Emergency.I havefocusedon the political
implicationsof the sterilisationprogrammeelsewhere3,here it might
suffice to look at one specific aspect.
At one level,it is interestingto note that the politicalmanifestations
of coercivesterilisationsled to such a majorchangein state policy. In
spite of two decades of invasive and authoritarianmethods used
against women and a small, though extremely articulate feminist
healthmovement,it has not been possibleto tilt the balancein favour
of women. On the otherhand, duringthe emergency,the bruntof the
coercive sterilisations was borne by poor, illiterate, low caste or
Muslim women.4What this seems to convey is that even the most
powerlessamong men possiblyenjoya greaterdegreeof control over
state policy than women do. The population policies in the country
have shown a marked insensitivityto the lives and experiences of
women, concentratingmainlyon filling quotas.
As a study of the policy of the Maharashtrastate reveals, in the
mid 1990's, a policy for women'shealthfocuses on empowermentof
women to enable populationcontrol. To quote:
"TheGovernmentwill initiateand supportall effortsto promote
an awareness among the public that the family welfare and
population policies of the state will succeedonly if women are
empoweredto decideon the issuesrelatedto the healthof their
families. She should specifically be empowered to decide on
issues regarding the size of the family and the health
interventionsaffectingthe children."5
Empowermentfor women is not seen as an end in itself. It is
projectedas a meansto the ultimateend of populationpolicy.Another
anomaly of the populationprogrammeis that it concentratesalmost
exclusivelyon controllingthe fertilityof marriedwomen.To the extent
that, in India,familyplanningand populationpolicy are synonymous
terms.The sexualityandfertilityof singlewomen remainsambiguous.
Bynot addressingthe specificneedsof singlewomen, official rhetoric
marginalises their sexuality. The Maharashtra State Policy, for
instance, gives incentives to married women who put off having
children.6 Thus,it leavesout women outsidethe scopeof the recognised
and conventionalfamily system.
 REPRODUCTION,ABORTIONAND WOMEN'SHEALTH 85

The family planningprogrammecan be more clearly looked at if

we focus on the Medical Terminationof PregnancyAct (henceforth
MTP Act), passed in 1971. The MTP act was directlyrelated to the
growing emphasis on family planning in the 1960's and the world
wide fears of a populationexplosion in the third world.
Therearedifferenttrajectoriesto the questionof populationcontrol
for the west and for India.In the west, the issue of abortion is linked
to the "right to self determination"and "the individual woman's
rightto choose". In the west, feministssupportingabortion (still not
legalizedin manywesterncountries)articulatetheirposition in terms
of the rightsof the woman. On the other hand, anti abortionistsalso
speak in the language of rights, claiming that their focus is on the
"rights and personhood of the foetus".' In contrast, in India, the
liberalisationof abortionwas not linkedto feministactivism.Health
activist Amar Jessani and Aditi Iyer suggest three possible reasons
for this:
"This might partly (though not wholly) be attributedto the
absence of a strong feminist current within the (women's)
movementduringthe 1960's and early 1970's... Secondly,anti
abortion votaries in India are not as belligerentor as strident
as theircounterpartselsewhere...thirdly,the low prioritymay
be engenderedby the unawarenessof the fact that legalisation
has not been buttressedby safe and humaneabortionservices.8
Implicit in this statement is a recognition that the IWM is not
always able to choose its agendaindependently.It is often forced to
respond to immediate and obvious crisis. Partly because the anti-
abortionistshave not beenvocal in India,the IWMhas not addressed
the abortion issue frontally,even though studies show that the right
to abortionremainsa paperright,due to inadequateabortionservices
in the country.Jessani and Iyer demonstratethat there is a ratio of
1:8 for legal to illegal abortions.9
The datacollectedby Jessaniand Iyerbringsout at least two issues
of significance.One, the inabilityof the IWM to prioritiseabortion,
owing perhaps to structural and organisational weaknesses. Its
campaignbased, somewhat sporadiccharacterpreventsmonitoring
of existing laws, the focus being on changes in law instead, this
could partly explain the campaign around amniocentesis, which I
will look at in greaterdetail later in this paper,secondly,as abortion
services are poorly developed, the state policy of using MTP as a
methodof contraceptionhas beena failure.It appearsthat conflicting
layers of inefficiency,corruption and patriarchalinterests create a
86 SOCIALSCIENTIST

situation wherein often even the positive aspects of reformist

legislation fail to percolate to those for whom it is theoretically
designed.
If we look at the MTPAct itselfandthe legislativedebatespreceding
it, we can see some clear patterns.
Therewas no seriousoppositionto the bill. Many MP'ssupported
it as an ideal method of family planning.SavitriShyam,for instance
arguedthat failure of contraceptionas a ground for abortion could
be justified only in the context of population control. She pointed
out that the FamilyPlanningProgrammein the country,where large
sums of money had been poured in was in fact a dismal failure. The
MTP Act was designedto counterthis failure,which should be stated
more clearly in the Statementsof Objects and Reasons of the act.'?
The notion that failureof contraceptioncould also be seen as a loss
of a woman's control over her body was not articulated, and is
completely missingin this understandingof abortion.
The bill was opposed only by one MP,who expressedhis anxiety
that it was against the "characterand the cultural beliefs" of the
country.He felt that it mightlead to an increasein sexualpromiscuity.
Hence, it should not be passed. He pointed out that as the MTP,act
could not be used by unmarriedwomen, it was in no way an advance
over existing legal provisions,as marriedwomen alreadyhad access
to abortion under Sec. 312 IPC. The intervention was not taken
seriously and was counteredby argumentsthat sexual promiscuity
was in fact, a part of Indian culture." Only one MP, Smt.
Laksmikantamma,felt that abortion rights be extended to single
women, given the existing social attitudesto "illegitimate"children.
Shepointed out that unlessabortionwas legalised,the health of such
a woman was "in the handsof quacks.""2. Her concern,however was
not shared by others in the house, nor incorporatedin the act.
Linked as is this act to the 'national' agenda of family planning
and populationcontrol, it continuesto exercisecontrol over the lives
of women. The MTP act is not, as stated above, designed to allow
women unconditionalcontrol over their bodies. Not all pregnancies
can be terminated.The declaredobjectsof the act are to help women
who become pregnantas a result of rape, marriedwomen who are
pregnantdue to contraceptivefailure,or to reducethe 'risk'of crippled
or severelyhandicappedchildrenbeingborn." In addition,the doctor
advisingthe abortionis enjoinedto look at the context within which
the woman lives and her generalhealth, i.e., whether the pregnancy
can pose a risk to the mother'smental or physicalhealth. Under the
 REPRODUCTION,ABORTIONAND WOMEN'SHEALTH 87

MTP Act, there are regulations which are framed at maintaining

records.The Doctorperformingthe operationhas to fill in a prescribed
form to be kept in a register.The form has a column in which the
doctor has to state the reasonsfor the abortion - legally,the woman
cannotavoid givingan explanation.The registeris a secretdocument,
to be destroyedby the doctor at the end of years since the date of the
last entry.14
There is, as is obvious even from this bald rendering of the
provisions,a scopefor misuse.The contextswithinwhichmostwomen
undergo MTPs includes a general sense of shame surrounding
extending to marriedand to single women. Many marriedwomen
conduct MTPs without the knowledge of their family members, at
times their husbands.For single women, the need for secrecyis even
morepressing.Not only do theyfacea greaterdegreeof socialcontrol,
the abortioncarriedout may well be falling out of the purviewof the
MTP act.5 Given this, the register can easily become a tool for
blackmail in the hands of unscrupulousmedical practitionersand
medicalstaff.
Besides,the insistencein the act thatthewomangivean explanation
and a denialof the clauseof failureof contraceptionto singlewomen,
bringsout two aspects.One, thatthe law is restrictedin its application.
It reveals the not so hidden moral agenda of the law makers. At a
more general level, the legal insistence on an explanation makes a
mockery of the woman's right to abortion, and in an extended
understanding,women's rights over their bodies.
The formal right to abortion to married women without the
necessaryconsentof theirhusbandscan be negatedor furtherrestricted
by legal interpretations.In a divorcecase underHinduMarriageAct,
1955, heard by the Delhi High Court in 1984, it was ruled that the
wife's act of undergoing a MTP without the husband's consent
amountedto cruelty.A divorcewas grantedto the husband.
The discomfortthat judgescan displayabbot the issue of abortion
can be sometimescouchedin seeminglyliberallanguage.A case heard
by the Madras High Court in 1993 was filed by the father of a 16
yearpregnantunmarriedgirl.The fatherpetitionedthatthe pregnancy
be terminatedas the girl was too young to bear a child. The lawyer
defendingthe girlpresentedthe case as one involvingthe fundamental
rightto life and liberty.He arguedthat the Constitutiondid not make
a distinctionwhen it came to adults and childrenon the question of
fundamentalrights. The Benchacceptedthe argumentand held that
the issue involved the basic rights of an individual.
88 SOCIALSCIENTIST

In addition, the Bench made two statements,which completely

overturnedthe perspective.It rejectedthe petitioner'sargumentthat
child birth in the case of minors was medically unsafe. Their view
was that, "the youngerthe mother,the better the birth." They felt
that if the first pregnancywas aborted,it could lead to sterility.The
judges concluded by quoting from Hindu, Muslim and Christian
scripturesthat "a destructionof life even within the mother'swomb
has no moral sanction."'6
The two judgmentscited above present judicial attitudes to the
question of abortion. In the first case, the independentdecision of a
marriedwoman was construedas crueltyand 'punished'with divorce.
In the second case, a minor'srightto individuallibertyand privacyis
supportedby the judges only in the context of traditionalviews on
motherhood.In both cases, abortionis held as abhorrent.In the first
case, the judge echoes social anxieties about women taking
independentdecisions.In the second,the minorgirl'sdecisionto have
a child outside wedlock is supportedeven while it transgressessocial
norms. But the supportitself is flawed.
Researcherspoint to other potential dangers of the MTP Act.
Jessani and Iyer hold that the currentexisting thrust on population
control and the "somewhat dubious motivations of the medical
profession"haveled to the act beinginterpretedliberally.They suggest
that there is a danger that this liberal interpretationcould easily
become a restrictiveone, "without a single word of the text being
altered". In other words, if there is a perceived national' need to
increasethe population, the existing law can well restrict women's
access to abortion. As it stands, every woman has to give an
explanationunderthe act. If the doctor interpretsthe explanation as
unviable,her access will be curtailed,This could well happen under
differentsocial, economic and demographicconditions.
Through the period of this study, however, several methods of
birthcontrol have been propagated.These include:female and male
sterilisation, contraceptivepills, IUDs, long acting hormone based
contraceptionssuch as Net-En, Depo-Provera,Nor-Plant and Anti-
FertilityVaccine."Feministshave arguedthat most of the methods
propagatedby the state are coercive, many are long acting and can
have negative effects on the health of the users. Feministshave not
always looked at the multi-national control and promotion of
contraception,or the global dimensionsof familyplanning,including
the export of harmfultechnologyto non westernwomen. When these
are addressedat all, it is understoodas revealingthe "weaknesses"
 REPRODUCTION,ABORTIONAND WOMEN'SHEALTH 89

of the Indianstate in not being able to withstand these pressures.8"

Another concern of feminists has been that most of the
contraceptivemethods listed above are aimed at women, absolving
menof anyresponsibilitytowardscontraception.ElaineLeissnerlooks
at four existing, but little known contraceptivemethods for men.
These include: non surgical vasectomy, permanentand temporary
contraceptionby injection,wet heat method, ultra sound methods.
All these are non- hormonalmethods. Lissnergoes on to say:
"Haveyou everwonderedwhy you have neverheardof these?
Researchbiasplaysa largepart.Male directedfundingagencies
find reasonsnot to fund researchon male contraception.Male
researchersare reluctantto tamper with the male body. As a
result, the public is not aware of alternativemethods."19
Activists hold that not only is the population policy in India
misogynist,it is in essenceracist, communaland anti-poor.In other
words, it aims to control the numbersof some groups. For instance,
population control enthusiasts have suggested that Muslim
populations in some parts of the country grow at a higher rate than
other communities.20
If one looks at the history of researchon contraceptives,we find
that since the mid 1960's, the focus has been on hormonal
contraception.A paperby a Bombaybased health activist written in
1986 accuratelypredictedthe impact of such research.21 Based on a
study of the 1983-4 annual report of the Indian Centre of Medical
Research (ICMR), she predicted that the ICMR would focus on
hormonal contraceptivesin accordancewith the directivesgiven by
the WHO. In the mid 1980's, the testing of NET-EN, an injectable
contraceptive, was conducted mostly in state run government
hospitals, on poor women, without informingthem of the possible
side effects of the drug. The lack of informed consent violated the
official WHO principlesfor clinical evaluation.
Savara'sfearsof the cafeteriaapproachthat would be inevitableif
suchpolicieswere continuedhave beenborneout in the 1990's. While
official rhetoricexplainsthe rangeof methodsavailableas increased
choice for women, some governmentofficials are honest enough to
admit that the marketingof such drugs into the country are a "part
and parcel of the liberalisationof the (Indian)economy.22
Health activists argue that the use of coercive methods by the
state will have disastrouseffects not only on individualwomen, but
on the country as a whole. In a letter written by 16 women's
organisationsto the Ministerfor Health and FamilyWelfarein 1994,
90 SOCIALSCIENTIST

it is reiteratedthat the "new trend of introducinghazardous, long

acting,provider-controlled, hormonalmethodsof contraceptionhave
been opposed by women'sorganisationsfor severalreasons."23 These
includethe side effectson women, suchas heartproblems,depression,
menstrual irregularitiesand effects on future fertility. There are
possibilities of the immune system being affected. Besides, these
contraceptives need sophisticated methods for screening and
monitoring users, which are not available in India. Even more
seriously,they can be misused as they can be and are administered
without a woman'sconsent. Nor is removalin case of complications
easy or possible. Control is thereforevested not in the woman as in
the case of barrier methods, but with medical practitioners, and
ultimatelywith the state.2
The letter goes on to point out that the FamilyPlanningmethods
used are counterproductive.To quote:
"The world over, there is enough experience to show that
contraceptiveprovisionis usefulonly for people readyto adopt
a smallfamilywhen theirlife conditionsimprove.In the absence
of this, contraceptivesare used as weapons to meet targets set
by the governmentand do little to meet the reproductiveneeds
of the people... conditions are being created in our country
which will lead to a growth in population, because there are
increasing cuts in the area of basic necessities... The well
accepted maxim that social development leads to decreased
growth in populationis not being followed in our country.The
only programme given impetus is the family planning
programme. "25
Some Delhi based women'sgroups have filed a case demandinga
stay on the introductionof injectablecontraceptives,which is still
pendingin the SupremeCourt.Filed in 1986, the petition demanded
that NET EN be introducedin the Family PlanningProgrammein
India only after propertesting. It also demandedthat an assurance
be given by the state that women be given accurateinformationprior
to use, along with the creation of medical screeningand follow up
facilities. An additional affidavit was filed in 1990, which included
other hazardous contraceptives,i.e., implants like Nor-Plant, anti
fertilityvaccines, nasal sprays into the scope of the petition.
The petition itself is modest in its demands- it does not ask for a
blanket ban on the methods, but for controls on the way in which it
is introduced.Inspiteof the case not being decidedyet, NET EN has
been introducedinto the countryalong with other methods included
 REPRODUCTION,ABORTIONAND WOMEN'SHEALTH 91

in the petition. Feminist interventionhas not proved successful in

this regard.In directcontrast,the campaignagainstsex determination
and pre- selection has resultedin obvious and dramaticsuccess - the
framingof a law banningit at the state and subsequently,the national
level. In the next section,I will look at feministand legislativedebates
aroundamniocentesisin Bombay.

II
DEBATESAND ACTIVISMIN BOMBAY
SEXDETERMINATION:
In the early 1980's, a campaign began in various parts of the
country around the practice of sex determination leading to the
abortion of female foetuses. Prior to this, in 1976, the government
has issued a partial ban on sex determination,not allowing the tests
to be conducted in governmenthospitals. The issue was revived in
1982, when some nationalnewspaperspublisheda news item and an
advertisementof a privateclinic in Chandigarh,offeringthis service.
Protestswere launchedin differentparts of the country by women's
groups, people'ssciencegroupsand health activists.At this juncture,
the campaignfocused on essentiallytwo issues. One, the potentially
dangerouseffects of the test on the foetus and the woman's uterus.
Second,the high degreeof inaccuracyof the tests. The campaignlost
its momentum when it became apparent that the test could be
improvedto do away with these problems.26 It seems that the failure
of the first phase of the campaignto maintainits tempo owed much
to its inabilityto link the issueto genderinequalityand to concentrate
instead, on medical aspectsof the tests.
In November1985, activistsfromsomewomen'sgroupsand health
activists in Bombay formed the FASDAP.The forum linked the
campaignto largerquestions of women's oppression, the misuse of
science and technology against people, and issues of human rights
violation.2 The campaignhad two aims: to pass a law banning sex
determinationand to generatedebate around the issue. I will focus
on the latter in this section.
The campaign met with some resistance. As Forum Against
Oppressionof Women(henceforthFAOW),an activepartof FASDAP
recognised, this was a campaign unlike any other in the past. In
campaignsagainstrape,domesticviolenceand dowry,women'sgroups
were met with at least a token hearing.In the case of this campaign,
there was hostility.A booklet broughtout in 1990 looks back at the
campaign.
"Right from the start, it became evident that since the large
92 SOCIALSCIENTIST

majority of people were not likely to support the campaign

spontaneously, we would have to develop newer forms to
highlightthis social issue. So, the campaign(concentratedon)
influencingthe attitudesof people against the test, daughters,
women in general;of women themselves who would readily
sacrificeanythingfor sons; the medicalcommunity and other
informedpersons."28
The methods of mobilising support included writing and
responding to the issue in the mainstream media, morchas and
demonstrations.In April 1986, a demonstrationwas held outside a
hospital in the city with postersdepictingthe test and the need to ban
it. On 14thNovemberof the sameyear,celebratedin Indiaas children's
day, a morchaa made up of parents and daughterswas held. Films
were made on the issue.2
The public campaigncoincided with a debate aroundthe issue in
the media. The debate was triggeredoff by an article written by
economist Dharma Kumar in an academic journal in 1983,
corresponding with the first phase of the campaign against sex
determination.DharmaKumarrespondedto the views expressedby
PranabBardhanwho fearedthat girls would disappearfrom India if
the tests continued.Bardhanheld that in any society,femalechildren
get care and food in direct proportion to their continued. Bardhan
held that in any society, female childrenget care and food in direct
proportionto theireconomicvalue. Hence, the survivalrateof female
children is higher in East and South India than in the rest of the
country.Marriagetoo is an economical institution.
Kumarfelt that if this view was indeedtenable,and if sex selection
would actuallyreducethe numberof girls in the country,their value
would rise. This would lead to a fall in dowry demands and an
improvementin the status of girl children and more generally, of
women. Shewent on to say that at that given junctureof history,sex
determinationtests, being expensive, were tapped only by the rich.
Her predictionwas that if the rich had only sons, they would have to
approachpoor familieswithin or even outside their own regions for
brides for their sons. That would reduce dowry demands, enable
national integrationand income re-distribution.Thus, the tests did
not pose a serioussocial danger,and might in fact lead to some good.
Kumaropposedthe demandfor a banon sex determinationtestsfor
two reasons.One, on the groundsthat scientificdevelopmentshould
notbecontrolled,or restricted. Secondly,thatfemalefoeticidewas "better
thanfemaleinfanticide,or severeill treatment"of girlchildren.30
 REPRODUCTION,ABORTIONAND WOMEN'SHEALTH 93

In another article, Kumarlinked the issue of sex determination

and pre-selectionwith that of abortion.Her view was that if feminists
were not fundamentallyopposed to abortion, it was inconsistentto
opposesex determinationon the groundsthat it could leadto abortion
of female foetuses. As she put it:
"In order to provide focus to the discussion, let us grant the
feminist pre supposition that abortion is not wrong in itself,
i.e., the foetushas no rightto life. But,feministswant to control
one form of foeticide, viz. female foeticide... Feminists hold
stronglythat the decision to abort is the pre prerogativeof the
mother alone, which makes it all the more necessary to ask
why the mothershould not be providedwith that information
on the consequencesof her decision."31
Kumarfelt that the practiceof femalefoeticidecould be countered
not by bans, but by reducing son preference,which existed in all
societies, through the implementationof state policies like pensions
for coupleswithout sons, trainingand employmentfor women, giving
jobs to women who remainunmarrieddue to dowry demandsor any
other reason.3
Dharma Kumarremainsvindicated in her predictionthat a ban
would prove ineffective against the practice of aborting female
foetuses. Her descriptionof feminist lack of clarity on the issue of
abortionand sex determinationalso remainspartiallyvalid.However,
her views have been challenged both directly and indirectly.That
amniocentesisposes no serious danger to population distributionis
erroneous, as sex ratios in the 1990's are clearly weighed against
women." Studies have demonstrated that son preference is not
uniform,but variesaccordingto regions,religionsand communities.
A survey conducted in seven districts in India by the Population
ResearchCentre,Chandigarhrevealsthat a largersegmentof Hindu
and Sikh women comparedto a substantiallysmallerproportionof
Muslim women have strong son preferenceand a greater desire to
know the sex of the foetuses."4
Social scientistshave arguedthat Kumar'sview that the decline in
the numberof girlsfollowingsex determinationandabortionof female
foetuses would lead to an enhancementin the status of girls and
women is untenable. Leela Dube, for instance feels that declining
femalepopulationcouldlead to abduction,saleof girlsand polyandry.
In order words, a furtherdecline in the status of women."
In the mid 1990's, the debatewas revivedagain, when the Central
Government announced its decision to pass a law banning sex
94 SOCIALSCIENTIST

determination, on the lines of the Maharashtralegislation. Some

expressedthe view that such a ban was both unethicaland would be
counter productive. A medical practioner pointed out that the
Mahashtralegislation had not improvedthe status of women, nor
had it preventedwomen from undergoingthe tests. It had merely
driven the practiceunderground.She added that it was her opinion
that legal prohibitionof sex determinationwas unethical, as it was
tantamountto infringingon the reproductiverights of women.36
A related opinion expressed by a Bombay based journalist was
that no state had the right to compel women to bear an unwanted
child. He wrote:
"Aban on sex determinationwill imposeunwantedpregnancies
on women. Nor can the law be enforced because no society
can shut away an availabletechnology from people."37
Whatis remarkable is thatthearguments opposingthebanarecouched
in the languageof rights.Thatis, therightof a womanto decidewhether
shewantsa femalechildor not. On the one hand,it is partiallytruethat
women may not alwaysbe able to decidefor themselveswhetherthey
want a girl or not. But,it is equallytruethat most women do not have
controlovermanyaspectsof theirlives,includingwhento havechildren,
how manychildrento have,etc. What the ban does is that it expresses
the politicalwill of the statethat it standsfor genderjustice.
The second presumption,that the ban is not enforceable,because
it has been ineffectivein one state, is somewhat limited. The failure
of the ban in Maharashtramay well be due to lack of will as far as
the implementationagencies are concerned. In other words, while
the state may well make a formal commitmentto gender justice, it
may not implementit at the level of policy. A partial explanation is
that the state is not a monolithic body, but is made up of diverse
trends and compulsions. At another level, it is the state is not a
monolithic body, but is made up of diversetrends and compulsions.
At another level, it is equally importantto recall that the state has
not been able to implementseveralpolicies and laws, includingthe
Dowry Prohibition Act, Section 498A IPC, etc. Some women's
organisationsfeel that here it is the responsibilityof feminists and
human rights activist to monitor laws and policies.38
III
BANNING SEXDETERMINATIONIN MAHARASHTRA:
A LEGISLATIVE
VICTORY?
The primaryaim of the FASDAPwas to get a legal ban on sex
determination.The FASDAPoccupiesan ambivalentposition for two
 REPRODUCTION,ABORTIONAND WOMEN'SHEALTH 95

reasons. One, that in addition to women from feminist groups, it

was madeup of men (andwomen)who mayor maynot clearlyidentify
with feministpolitics. In that, it is differentfrom all the other groups
that we have encounteredso far, where the role of men, if present
remainsmarginal.The primaryfocus in the forumwas to abolish sex
determination.Secondly,the forum was a campaign group with a
single agenda, which disbandedas soon as the ban was imposed in
Maharashtra.39
The following statement of the FASDAP brings out their
commitmentto lobbying:
"Lobbying...helped give us a direction;it helped to raise the
issueon variousplatforms,and it focusedattentionon the point
that we were tryingto make."40
In addition to the activitiesof the Forum,women's organisations
in the city were also taking other steps to protest against sex
determination.A petition was filed in the High Court in Bombayby
Mahila Dakshata Samiti following the death of a woman who had
undergonesex determinationtests in September1986. The petition
contentedthat the tests violatedArticle2 of the constitution,i.e., the
right to life.41The argumentwas uncomfortablyclose to those used
by anti-abortionistsin the west. The argumentin both cases was that
a foetus has a right to life, hence by extension, no foetus should be
aborted.As we haveseen,in India,inspiteof formallegalliberalisation
of abortion, thereremainsa great degreeof discomfort,socially and
politically, with the notion of abortion. FASDAP,however tried to
avoid this pitfall by basingits appealon genderjusticeand reiterating
time and again that they did not oppose abortion per se.4
Lobbyingby FASDAPhadveryvisibleandobviousresults.In 1986,
the Public Health Departmentof the Governmentof Maharashtra
formed a committee under the chairpersonshipof the Minister for
Public Health and Family Welfare to study the problem of sex
determinationand female foeticide. A study was commissionedand
conducted by Dr. SanjeeevKulkarni.The study tried to gauge the
magnitudeof the problemthrougha surveyof private clinics in the
city. Dr. Kulkarniestimatedthat about 78,000 cases of abortion of
female foetuses had taken place in Indiabetween 1978-82 following
sex determinationthroughamniocenteses.43
He found that of his sample of 50 Doctors practicingin the city,
84% performedamniocentesisfor the purposeof sex determination,
and not for detectinggeneticdisorders.As many as 37 Doctors of the
samplehadbeenperformingthesetestsfor at least5 years83% doctors
96 SOCIALSCIENTIST

who performedthe tests conductedMTPs after the results in case it

was desired by the woman. The reason given by those who did not
do so was that after the resultsin case it was desiredby the woman.
The reason given by those who did not do so was that they did not
perform mid trimester MTPs in the normal course. Each doctor
conductedan averageof 1-20 tests everymonth. Most of the women
approachingthe doctors for sex determinationbelonged to middle
class and upper middle class families, and the majority had 2-3
daughterspriorto undergoingthe tests. The costs of the tests ranged
accordingto the doctors, between Rs. 70-600.
Kulkarnifound that most of the women who had undergonethe
tests said that they had not been forced by their families to undergo
the tests. Significantly, most of the doctors conducting sex
determinationtests felt that theywere performinga "humane"service
to women who did not want to have more daughters.One Fifth of
the sampleopinedthat sex determinationtestswere an effectivemeans
of family planning."
Here, I would like to focus on a curious contradiction, both in
feminist and state responses.At one level, feminists,while opposing
the family planning programmeof the state point to the perceived
and stated need of women to have more children. However, a
significantaspectof the Indianrealityis thatmost families,andwomen
within them want more sons than daughters,and that women may
not welcome childbearing and nurturing for girl children. The
opposition to sex determination,which is a part of son presence in
its most extreme form, cannot be complete without an
acknowledgmentof this factor. At the level of the state, while the
tests do constitute a way of reducingthe size of the family,the state
did feel obliged to take a public stand on the issue by banningthem.
The focus here is to point to the complexities of state and feminist
responsesto the issue.
Dr. Kulkarni's report was followed by a law in Maharashtra
banning sex determination in 1988. The law was designed to
regulate the use of medical or scientific technique of pre-natal
diagnosis solely for the diagnosis of genetic or metabolic disorders
and not for sex determination.5"An expert committee in which
representatives from the FASDAP were present was formed to
formulate the law.
The bill was introducedand passedin both the LegislativeCouncil
and the Assembly in Maharashtrain asingle sitting. The legislators
displayeda eagernessto pass the bill, looking at it as symbolic of the
 REPRODUCTION,ABORTIONAND WOMEN'SHEALTH 97

progressivenature of politics in the state. An MLA put it in these

words:
"Maharashtrahas lived up to its revolutionaryheritage. It is
the first state in Indiato have introducedthe bill."46
AnotherwomanMLApointedout thatthe billneedsto be extended
to the entire country if it has to be effective.
"The bill needs to be extended to all over the country...
Otherwise,the women of Maharashtrawill go to neighbouring
states and get the tests done."47
Here as in other legislativedebates,women were cast in extremely
stereotypicalmoulds - women were constructedas passivepotential
or real mothers.
"Why are girls being treated badly?Women give birth to the
whole world. Therefore,they are more importantto the world
than men are. The nation needs women because women are
the creators of all life, women can do all kinds of work. If
women are enslaved,how can the nation flourish?"48
The statementquoted abovecombines a sentimentalisedimage of
women as mothers, and girls as potential mothers with the more
utilitarianunderstandingthat women do more work than men do.
For both these reasons, they are essential for the prosperity and
progress of the nation. Another MLA issued a warning to men on
behalf of all women:
"The question of violence against women is not a joke. (Men
think that) women are calm and non violent. But they do not
know what can happen to the world when women adopt a
different form."49
The referencehere is clearly to the Hindu myth of the goddess
Parvati,who is passiveand calm, until she is forcedby circumstances
to adopt the more ferociousform of Kali, known for slayingdemons
in orderto preventthe destructionof the world. However,the analogy
seems a bit misplaced here. She also commented on the silence of
men as far as the debateson the issue was concerned.One male MLA
was quick to respondto what he clearly saw as a challenge:
"I welcome this bill. Women legislators have expressed their
views and supportfor the bill. I will speakon theirrequestthat
men should speak out. My sister,Hon. Member,Smt. Sharayu
Thakurholds that only men ask whether the foetus is male or
female. This is false. Evenwomen always favourtheir sons."50
What is significantis that the debates did not focus at all on the
bill itself, nor on the issuesraisedby the healthactivistsand feminists.
98 SOCIALSCIENTIST

The bill that was passedmay have been a partialvictory for activists,
but as the debatesreveal,the MLA'schoose to ignore or were unable
to comprehendthe questionsand issues raised.
The bill itself was full of loopholes. It includedin its scope all pre-
natal diagnostic test, restricted them only for testing foetal
abnormalaitiesin pregnantwomen medically established as "high
risk" groups.These includedwomen above the age of 35 years, with
a history of abortionor of mental retardationin the family.It made
it mandatoryfor the medicalpractionerconducingthe test to obtain
the consent of the woman undergoingthe test in the prescribedform
after explainingto her,the potential side effects of the procedure."
The bill providedfor the setting up of a monitoringgroup, called
the State AppropriateAuthority.The group was to be made up of
governmentemployees,representatives of voluntaryorganisationsand
doctors. The representativesof voluntaryorganisationsand doctors
were to be nominatedby the stategovernment.The state government,
thusenjoysuncheckedpowersunderthis clause.The StateAppropriate
Authorityis entrustedwith extensivepowers,includingjudicialpowers
to try out cases relatedto the violation of this Act.
The Act bannedthe use of medicaltechniquesfor the purposesof
sex determination.It made it mandatoryfor each genetic centre and
laboratory in the state to register itself under this Act. Prior to
registration, the State Appropriate Authority would conduct an
inquiry.The FASDAPcomplainedthat all theseprovisionscontributed
to increasein red tapism. They pointed out that many of the private
clinics who would apply for registrationhad in fact conductedthese
tests in the past. If they were given licences - which some of them
were - it would actuallylegitimiseunethicalpracticescarriedout by
them earlier.
Another anomaly of the Act is that none of the bodies appointed
underthis Act wereanswerableto the public.It restricteddirectaccess
of the public vis-a-vis violation of the law. Accordingto Section 21
(1) of the Act, the courtscan take cognizanceof an offence underthis
Act, only if a complaintis filed by "AppropriateAuthority,State or
local Vigilance Committee.""5 A privatecitizen can file a complaint
only to the AppropriateAuthority or the State or local Vigilance
Committee,who then takes it up. The committeesare providedwith
discretionarypowers and can in some cases, ignore the ordersof the
court. FASDAPpoints out that none of the bodies appointed under
the Act are in any way answerableto the public,violatingeverynorm
of democratic functioning.As FASDAPputs it, "No punishmentis
 REPRODUCTION,ABORTIONAND WOMEN'SHEALTH 99

given to them for failing in their duty; this leaves people with little
recoursein the face of repeatednegligenceon the part of the state."53
To me, what seems most significantin the Act is the lack of clarity
about how the woman conducting the test is to be legally viewed.
While there is a clause that prescribesa punishmentfor the woman
under going the test, on the other hand, the Act presumesthat she
has been coerced into performingthe test. Section 19 (2) of the Act
states that:
"... Providedfurtherthat, the Court shall always presume,unless
otherwise proved, that a woman who seeks the aid of pre-natal
diagnosticprocedureson herself,has been compelledto do so by her
husbandor membersif his family...the woman shall be liable to pay
a fine of Rs. 50 for each such offence.""4
Though the fine payable by the woman is a token amount, to
punisha personpresumedto be coercedin to an actionseemsviolative
of naturaljustice. On the other hand, all women undergoingthe test
do so at the behest of their husbands and family members, which
denies them agency and responsibilityfor their actions.
With all these lacunae, the FASDAPwho had fought to get to get
the ban, was initially reluctant to support the act. However, they
decided to extend their support, as they felt that opposing the bill
would be counterproductive,as it would defeat the campaign.After
it was passed, the Act did not prove effective. None of the bodies
mentionedin the bill: the State AppropriateAuthorityand the State
VigilanceCommitteewas set up until 1989, a year after the bill was
passed. Inspiteof the clause that mandatedit, voluntarybodies were
inadequatelyrepresented,and FASDAPcompletely left out in the
composition of the bodies. One of the greatestmarkersof the failure
of the Act is that between 1988-1998, not a single case has been
registeredunder the Act, and the practice continues in the city of
Bombay.
IV
AN INEFFECTIVE
THE NATIONALBILL:REPLICATING LAW?
In 1994, the Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques (Regulation and
Preventionof Misuse) Act was passedin Parliament.Between 1988-
1994, three states had followed the example set by Maharashtrato
pass laws banning sex determination tests. These were Punjab,
Haryanaand Rajasthan.
In February1987, a Centralcommitteeon sex determinationwas
set up by the central government headed by Rajiv Gandhi. The
committee submitted its report, on the basis of which a bill was
100 SOCIALSCIENTIST

framed. The bill, which replicated many of the loopholes of the

MaharashtraAct, was introducedin the Lok Sabhain 1990, but was
not passed until 1994.
One of the primaryproblemswith this bill, as with the state law,
as far as activists were concerned, was the clause that the woman
undergoing the test would would be subjected to punishment. A
member of the committee, an activist of the FASDAP,submitted a
note of dissent to this clause in the bill. The note stated:
"I believe that a woman'schoice to undergothe test is a result of
subtle and not so subtle pressures exerted on her by her family,
community and society.It is not a conscious choice... so, it is unjust
to pr6nounce her guilty under this Act. Punishment...would mean
furthervictimizing the victim of oppression and equating her with
the oppressors,so such a woman should not be punished.""
Other than this consideration,what is significantin this clause is
that, unlikein the MaharashtraAct, the state bill recommendeda far
more stringentpunishmentthan a token fine. Underthe Centrallaw,
all those contravening the law, including the doctors, the family
membersandthe womanherself,are subjectto a uniformpunishment,
i.e., three years imprisonmentand a fine of Rs 10,000. Given this,
even if a woman had indeedbeen pressuredby her familyto undergo
the test, she would be unlikely to report them if she too would be
punished.
Apart from this, the Centralact too invests the responsibilityof
implementing the Act with two officials appointed by the state
government, i.e., with members of the Appropriate Authorities
Committeeand the AdvisoryCommittee.The composition of both is
left somewhat ambiguous."Like the MaharashtraAct, the central
act does not allow a privatecitizen to access the courts directlyif he
or she comes across a violation of this Act, all complaints are to be
routedthroughthe AppropriateAuthoritiesCommittee,who has the
final authoritywhetherto follow up a complaint.
As with the MaharashtraStatelaw, the framersof the centralAct
see themselvesas undertakinga nearrevolutionarystep.The statement
of objects and reasonsof the bill reads as follows:
"Sex determinationtests are being operativefor the past so many
years in the country. Many people have earned a lot of money by
operatingsuchcentres.The tests arenow increasinglyused by parents
and medical practitionersfor pre-birthsex determinationwith the
intention of abortingthe femalefoetus. If this is allowed to continue,
it will result in distortedmale female ratio in the country.It is high
 REPRODUCTION, ABORTION AND WOMEN'S HEALTH 101

time that such a legislation is broughtforward to ban such tests in

the country.Hence, this bill."57
The self congratulatoryair seenin this extractechoesthe Assembly
debatesin Maharashtrain 1988. Boththe Acts - national and state -
are clearlyinadequate,yet legislatorsappropriatefor themselvesthe
radical fervor that belongs elsewhere.Simultaneously,the FASDAP
found that it was being creditedwith the national bill, which it was
uncomfortablewith - for two reasons.One, becauseit did not think
thatthe bill fulfilledthe objectivesandgoals of the campaign.Secondly,
because they saw it as a form of co option. This extract brings out
some of these dilemmas:
"Theproposed centrallegislationis in a sense an achievementof
the nation wide campaign.The way in which this 'achievement'has
been creditedto us and the whole question of democraticprinciples
and values trouble us. In away,we see a parallelin our use of the law
and in the establishment'spromotion of technological solutions.
Society tries to find solutions to social problems in technological
innovations:are we too seekingsuch solutions throughthe agencyof
the law? Whenever we ask for reforms in existing laws, or the
formulations of new laws, are we expecting the state to be on the
side of women?"5'
The FASDAPin the statementabove revealsa degreeof sensitivity
to some of the issues of working on legal reform. They, like many
other feministgroups,were scepticalof the state'srhetoric.However,
they also felt that the process of campaigning for the changes in
legislationcould createan atmospherein which issues were debated.
Public debate and activism could force the state to act against
violations of humanrights.5While this might well be a valid reading
of the processesof change, the group does not addressthe dilemma
of indirectlyempoweringthe stateandlegitimisingthe statemachinery
by participatingin the law makingprocess.
One view expressed by Nivedita Menon is that is impossible to
expect justice from the state and the legal machinery.She suggests
that it is dangerousto seek the "interventionof law to restrict the
developmentof any technologythat could be judgedcapableof being
used for sex determination."60 Dangerous because it can hand over
"entireareasof scienceandknowledgeto bureaucraticcontrol"which
is in fundamentalcontradiction to feminist ideals of democracy."
Nivedita Menon points out that the broaderaims of the FASDAP- to
make science and technology accessible to people in a genuinely
democraticmanner,i.e., people to have the freedom to choose and
102 SOCIALSCIENTIST

reject technology after ascertainingits risks and benefits at a social

level - cannot be realized through legislation. What is needed is a
radicalre thinkingof the issues and strategiesinvolved. Significantly
she critiques the FASDAPfor failing to recognise this, instead for
being overwhelmed by "the hegemonic perception of law as a
transformativeinstrument."62
WhileNiveditaMenon'sanalysisis mostlyvalid,it is my perception
that she underestimatesthe sensitivity of the FASDAPto the issues
involved. As we have seen, the FASDAPrecognisesthe limitationsof
law, and the dangers of working with the state on legal reform.
Simultaneously,they hold to the need of legal interventionsalong
with non-legal strategiesfor transformation.
The FASDAP,like other activist groups are force to respond to
exigenciesat an immediate,everyday basis, while puttingforward a
long term perspectiveof the world and politics. This can lead to
seeming contradictionsin positions. The FASDAPmembersare not
entirely comfortablewith the notion that tests be allowed even for
the purposesof detectinggeneticabnormalities.This, they believe, is
a part of eugenic and rascist policies, which allows only "perfect"
human beingsto be born. However,they also feel that as women are
primarilyresponsiblefor child rearing,not allowing these tests can
put an additional burdenon women.'3Unfortunately,this position
leavesthemopento the chargethat a similarargumentcan be extended
when it comes to the issue of sex determination.
There is anotherdilemma.As Menon rightlypoints out, the state
may well - and does - misuse science and technology for dangerous
purposes.The nucleartestingsin Pokhranis only one such example.
However,in the absenceof regulationsby the state, thereis the other
danger,especiallyin contemporaryliberalisedIndia,that consumerist
concerns will completely take over the production of science and
technology.
Groups like the FASDAPworking on the health concerns of
marginalisedgroups like women and children are forced to weigh
these often contradictorypulls. The decidingfactorsbecomedifficult
to reconcilewith each other,even as the broad aims remain placing
at a priority,the concernsof women.
 REPRODUCTION,ABORTIONAND WOMEN'SHEALTH 103

NOTES

This paper is based on my on-going researchon the women'smovementin

westernIndia
I wish to thankProf.SumitSarkarand Dr.NiveditaMenonfor theircomments
and suggestions.

1. GabrielleDietrich,Reflectionson the Women'sMovement,Religion,Ecology,

Development,Horizon IndiaBook, New Delhi, 1992-34.
2. Mira Savara,Women and Reproduction.Paperpresentedat The National
Conferenceon Women'sMovementsin India, Bombay,1980. Unpublished.
Malini Karkal,Hum Do, HamareDo in KamaxiBhateet al ed., In Searchof
Our Bodies.A FeministLook at Women,Healthand Reproductionin India,
Shakti,Bombay,1987, 50-53.
3. See Chapter1, DifferentStreams- The FeministMovementsin Bombay.
4. Karkal,Ibid, 51.
5. Policyfor women, Governmentof Maharashtra.GovernmentCentralPress,
Bombay,June 1994, 31
6. Ibid., 31-32.
7. NiveditaMenon, 'TheImpossibilityof 'justice'.FemaleFoeticideand feminist
discourse on abortion, Contributionsto Indian Sociology, Vol. 29, No.1
and 2. (1995), 369-392, esp. 371-2.
8. AmarJessaniand Aditi Iyer,'Womenand Abortion'Economicand Political
Weekly,Vol. 23, No. 48, 259-94, esp. 2591.
9. Lok Sabha Debates, Fifth Series,Vol. 7, No.52, 2nd August 1971, 2593.
10. Ibid., 166.
11. Dr. LaksmiNarayanPandit,Ibid. 180.
12. Smt. Laksmikantamma,ibid, 185.
13. ShriD.P.Chattopadhaya,the Ministerof Statein the Ministryof Health and
FamilyPlanning...Ibid.
14. Medical Terminationof PregnancyAct, 1971, Women and Child Welfare
Department,Ministry of Human ResourceDevelopment, Governmentof
India, 1971.
15. Based on my experiencein working with the health workers,Action India
Women'sProgramme,New Delhi in 1994.
16. Cited in Nivedita Menon, op.cit., 386.
17. Pros and Cons of Contraceptivesavailablein India.Pamphletby ForumFor
Women'sHealth, Bombay.Date not specified.
18. Ibid.
19. ElaineLessner,ContraceptiveMethods - for Men. Ms. Jan - Feb 1992. On
file with Aksharadocumentationcentre,Mumbai.
20. K.B. Sahay,'Snip out the Problem',The Telegraph,19.01.1996.
21. MiraSavara,ContraceptiveResearchin India,Paperpresentedin Workshop
on women,healthand reproduction.Bombay,December1986. Unpublished.
22. Quotedin FactsagainstMyths,Informationbullettin,Volume1, No.9 Vikas
AdhyanKendra,Bombay,1-2.
23. Letterwrittento the Ministerof Health and FamilyWelfare.New Delhi, by
sixteen women'sorganisations.1994.
24. Ibid.
25. Ibid.
104 SOCIALSCIENTIST

26. Forum Against Sex Determinationand Sex Preselection(FASDAP),Using

Technology,Choosing Sex, The Campaignagainst Sex Determinationand
the Question of Choice,UnpublishedPaper.
27. Ibid.
28. ForumAgainst Oppressionof Women (FAOW),Participatingin the ANti-
Amniocentesis Campaign in Forum against Oppression of Women,
Moving...But Not Quite There,Bombay,1990, 25.
29. Ibid.
30. Dharma Kumar,Male Utopias or Nightmares? Economic and Political
Weekly,VolumeXVIII,No.3, January15, 1983, 61-64.
31. Dharma Kumar,Amniocentesis Again. Economic and Political Weekly,
VolumeXVIII,No. 24, June 11, 1983, 1075-1076.
32. Ibid.
33. Study cited in Logan Rai, 'Life,s hard, Little Girl', The Times of India,
23.06.1985.
34. Study cited in ManimoyDasgupta, The Telegraph,25.09.1997.
35. Leela Dube, 'Misadventuresin Amniocentesis', Economic and Political
Weekly,VolumeXVIII,NO.8, February19, 1983.
36. Ruth Macklin, 'The Ethics of Sex Selection', Medical Ethics, Volume III,
NO, 4. October-November1995, 61-64.
37. Arvind Kala, 'Why Ban Sex Determination Tests?', The Statesman,
19.02.1994.
38. PersonalCommunicationwith Gopika Solanki. I may also point out here
that there is a strongsection in the IWM that arguesthat legal activismhas
lost its validity for feminists. I will examine these argumentslater in the
chapter.
39. Ibid.
40. FASDAP,Using technology...op. cit.
41. FlaviaAgnes,State,Genderand The Rhetoricof Law Reform, RCWS,SNST
University,Genderand Law Series,Book 2, 177.
42. FASDAP,Using Technology...op.cit.
43. Dr.SanjeevKulkarni,PreNatal sex determinationtestsand femalefoetice in
Bombaycity.Commissionedby the Secretaryto the GovernmentDepartment
of PublicHealth and FemaleWelfare,Maharashtra.
44. Ibid, 3-11.
45. MaharashtraLegislativeCouncilBill, No.8 of 1988. MaharashtraLegislative
Council.
46. Smt.RanjanaStav,MaharashtraLegislativeAssemblyDebates, Volume,82,
16.04.1988, 56. Translatedfrom Marathi.
47. Smt. ParvatiParihar,Ibid, 57-58. Translatedfrom Hindi.
48. Smt. DamayantiDeshbrather,Ibid, 61. Translatedfrom Marathi.
49. Smt. ParvatiParihar,Ibid, 58. Translatedfrom Hindi.
50. ShriD.G. Sopal, Ibid, 60. Translatedfrom Marathi.
51. MaharashtraLegislativeCouncil Bill, No. 8 of 1988. op.cit., Section 3-5.
52. Ibid, Section21 (I) (a) (b).
53. Using Technology,op.cit.
54. MaharashtraLegislativeCouncilBill. No. 8 of 1988, op.cit., Section 19 (2).
55. Dr. R.P. Ravinder,cited in Swati Chaturvedi,'Dissent Note on Sex Test
Ignored', The Statesman,12.02.1992.
 REPRODUCTION,ABORTIONAND WOMEN'SHEALTH 105

56. Dr.AmitSengupta,'Pre-natalDiagnosticTechniquesBill:LoopholesGalore',
The Lawyers,February1992, 16.
57. The Banningof Sex DeterminationTestsAct. Governmentof India, 1991.
58. Using Technology...op.cit.
59. Ibid.
60. Nivedita Menon, op.cit., 380.
61. Ibid.
62. Ibid, 381.
63. FASDAP,op.cit.

NEW FROM TULIKA

The Long Transition

Essayson PoliticalEconomy
UTSA PATNAIK

A selection of essays covering a wide range of fields from eco-

nomic theory to economic history, the problems of
socialist economics and the dynamics of Indian agriculture.
They attempt to engage with 'the present as history', the
'present' marked by the phenomenon of imperialism whose
conceptual presence permeates many of the essays. The con-
cepts of class and the mode of production are developed and
used for exploring these issues.
pp. xv + 460 Rs 595 (Hb)

Special Discount Offer

Individual subscribers to Social Scientist may avail of a spe-
cial discount offer on sending us details of name and subscrip-
tion number to the following address:
TULIKA
35A/1, Third Floor, Shahpur Jat, New Delhi 110 049
Tel: 649 1448 Telefax: 649 7999