Calling the shots

Just witnessed another 'Great Indian drama'.



This is about Mehtas and the debate that starts with their simple, logical and very valid plea.
What I fail to understand is - Who calls the shots here?

[picture courtesy - placebojournal.com]

We have various entities:

- Disabled rights groups / Organizations
From disabled rights groups' conveners to secretaries of organizations like ' right to die with dignity' all giving their views on what should be the next step and what is the right way, the ethical way and the only way.

- Doctors
Who tell you about the probabilities of the unborn child having disabilities post the diagnosis.

- Lawyers / Judges
Who tell you about their field and the intricacies of the legal system

- Media people - arranging a get-together of all of the above
Organizing the talk show where all the above parties are invited and poking 'whichever' party with an anti-logic and "Do you mean to say..." questions.

- Parents
In my opinion the one and only who should've been involved - It's their child after all and they are the ones who would be constantly involved in the whole life-cycle - theirs AND child's.

All the others here would forget the case in a month, if not earlier.
It's a shame that it has got down to this that people are writing articles about it, giving opinions, holding strong view-points.Of course, me included.
Who are we to say anything about what the parents should do?
They state it clearly that they cannot afford the child - financially or emotionally.
Then we have the category 1 people saying
' financially, we would assist them..... there are many organizations who would assist you financially' and for the emotional quotient, statements like "the doctor has just given a probability / indication on child's disability, it's not certain. 1 in 10 children have this kind of an issue, does this mean we should kill 1/10^th of the children"

This is ridiculous, the last part of the statement above.

No father or mother would want to kill their child and it certainly is the biggest pain for them and the pain is biggest for them, if at all it is a pain for anybody else.
They want to consciously make this choice of conducting an abortion
- so what if it has already been 25 weeks, the disability has been detected now only.
I completely turn a deaf ear to statements like ' the foetus is 25 weeks and it is almost like a child, so conducting an abortion would tantamount to killing a child'
- of course sir, it is being explicitly said that they want to go ahead with the abortion of the child still in womb because they know they cannot, and even if they could, they do not want to bring such a life which would be a pain - primarily for the child, and for the parents. All it means is bringing the unfortunate event to an end, scrabbling with words as you are, yes, it does mean killing the child, terminating the life, eliminating a human even before it is born and more grotesque versions of it.

Only people (parents) with very very high motivation levels / courage would be able to swallow this and plan the fight accordingly - in that case everything is fine, smooth - applause.
Story's quite different (logical and common, if u ask me) here -
If the parents themselves are demotivated and cannot raise such a child, how can anyone come and make strong, inflexible statements and order the next steps.

I'm in complete agreement with the parents and it their and only their prerogative to decide the next steps, the legal systems which define it in terms of '24 and not 25 weeks that it can be decided in' are techno and logically poor reasoning.
These laws are way old, why don't you try improvising the system - I know, charity begins at home.

All said and done - I plead, let the parents decide the future steps - they know it and they are the ones, and nobody else, who are going to bear the repercussions of the good / bad judgment .

In Ed's words - Society, you're a crazy breed...