NEW DELHI — The Indian prime minister described the widespread practice of aborting female fetuses as a “national shame” on Monday, and called for stricter enforcement of laws devised to prevent doctors from helping parents to avoid the birth of unwanted daughters.
In his first speech on the subject, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh highlighted an “alarming” decline in the number of girls for every 1,000 boys in India, slipping to 927 in 2001 from 962 in 1981, according to the latest census figures. “This indicates that growing economic prosperity and education levels have not led to a corresponding mitigation in this acute problem,” he said.
“No nation, no society, no community can hold its head high and claim to be part of the civilized world if it condones the practice of discriminating against one half of humanity represented by women,” Mr. Singh said, giving an inaugural speech at a national conference dedicating to “saving the girl child,” which brought together politicians, doctors and advocates.
Describing female feticide as “inhuman, uncivilized and reprehensible,” he said the government had a responsibility to crack down on the large numbers of Indian doctors who illegally reveal the sex of the fetus to the parents, and then arrange abortions to get rid of unwanted girls.
Over past three decades, the increasing availability of ultrasound equipment has assisted India’s cultural preference for sons and distorted the sex ratio across the nation.
As the equipment has become more affordable, special ultrasound clinics have opened even in the most impoverished parts of the country, where other health care facilities remain rudimentary.
Before undergoing an ultrasound test in India, pregnant women must sign a form agreeing not to seek to know the sex of the unborn child. Doctors who reveal the sex during an examination can be imprisoned for up to five years. But the law is widely flouted. Studies suggest that doctors often give coded hints, by remarking for example, “Your child will be a fighter,” or by offering pink or blue sweets, as appropriate, on the way out. There have been very few successful prosecutions.
Because parents are still expected to give their new son-in-law a large dowry at their daughter’s wedding, girls are widely regarded as financial liabilities, who will leave their parents large debts when they marry. Sons, by contrast, are traditionally valued because they remain with their parents to care for them in their old age.
“The patriarchal mindset and preference for male children is compounded by unethical conduct on the part of some medical practitioners, assisted by unscrupulous parents, who illegally offer sex-determination services,” Mr. Singh said.
He urged government ministries to work together “to deal with this terrible onslaught on our civilization.”
The Lancet, the British medical journal, estimated in 2006 that as many as 10 million female fetuses had been aborted in India over the previous 20 years by families trying to secure male heirs.
Unicef echoed those findings in an analysis of the Indian census, noting that the imbalance in the sex ratio had become particularly acute in India’s wealthier regions, where money did little to temper the traditional preference for sons, and where couples were easily able to afford ultrasound tests.
“Misuse of advanced prenatal diagnostic techniques has led to sex selection with the widespread termination of female fetuses, contributing to a rapidly declining girl-to-boy child sex ratio,” a recent Unicef report stated, adding that unless “urgent action” was taken to reverse this trend, “the social repercussions for future generations could be devastating.”
Dr. Puneet Bedi, a campaigner against sex selection, said he was disappointed by the prime minister’s speech. “It is not enough for him to preach to us about the problem,” Dr. Bedi said. “The current laws are not being enforced. It is the government’s responsibility to take action.”
Sabu George, another prominent campaigner, welcomed the prime minister’s decision to devote an entire speech to the subject, but agreed that the content was “very disappointing.”
“We have a very good law, but it is not being implemented. That is the government’s responsibility,” he said. “He talked about changing mind-sets. He should have focused on how the law could be implemented.”