Mother can decide whether to give birth to child with abnormalities: Madras High Court

Chennai: The Madras High Court has permitted a woman to terminate her pregnancy beyond 24 weeks after medical scans revealed significant foetal abnormalities, observing that the mother has the right to decide whether to bring the child into the world.

Justice P T Asha passed the order on October 15, overturning a medical board’s decision to reject the woman’s request for termination.

“In the instant case, the scan reports clearly show substantial fetal abnormalities. The mother has the right to take a decision as to whether she would like to bring such a child into the world, particularly when the child is not going to lead a normal life,” the court said.

The woman had approached the court after scans showed that the foetus had mild ventriculomegaly, a condition in which the fluid-filled spaces in the brain known as lateral ventricles become enlarged.

Medical records indicated that the condition could increase the risk of several developmental difficulties. These included speech and language delays, learning difficulties, cognitive and behavioural problems, communication challenges, epilepsy and intellectual disability.

After learning about the findings, the woman and her husband decided to terminate the pregnancy. However, the medical board did not approve their request, stating that the neurological abnormalities were not life-threatening.

The woman then challenged the decision before the High Court.

The court noted that the scan reports showed substantial abnormalities and acknowledged the difficult decision taken by the parents. It said they had considered the risks to the child’s ability to lead a dignified and independent life.

“It is the parents who would have to watch, day in and day out, the suffering that such a child would have to undergo. The parents have taken this decision to ensure that the child is not brought into this world to lead a life of indignity,” the court observed.

The court also said the unborn child had a right to live with dignity and not face ridicule. It added that the child’s life after the parents’ lifetime was another factor that had to be considered.

After considering earlier judicial rulings and the medical reports, the court quashed the order rejecting the termination request.

It directed the hospital to carry out the procedure in accordance with the medical records and specified that it must be performed by a registered medical practitioner.