I do not regularly post in this group. However, after reading the discussion on S. 15 of the UP Population Control Bill, I felt compelled to speak. If we cannot collectively raise our voices against such blatant display of ableism and pure and simple discrimination, then we might as well shut this group down and go home. These words sound harsh, I know, but nothing less would suffice to respond to the insensitivity displayed by those supporting the provisions at issue. Here are my thoughts.
First, please understand what this provision [S. 15] seeks to do. It seeks to inscribe into law a provision that would say that the rule that you can only have two children, created by this law, will not apply in the event that you have a disabled child. In such cases, you are entitled to have three children. In other words, the Bill says that a disabled child simply does not count as a child. It says that, as parents, you are entitled to a do over if a child with a disability is born to you. Second, if the above does not constitute a frontal assault to the dignity of disabled bodies, I wonder what does. If the above provision does not negate the personhood of the disabled, I wonder what does. If the above provision does not inscribe into law the most horrific stereotypes about having a disability that we all seek to confront everyday in direct and indirect ways, I wonder what does. Third, to say that the bill would have been criticized even if it did not have such a provision and hence we should just put up with our statutorily sanctioned humiliation and negation, I am sorry to say, reflects a way of thinking that is dismissive at best and appallingly discriminatory at worst. Fourth, the claim that the criticism of the provision is only academic and is divorced from prevailing ground realities is an equally problematic view. It is true that many still view having a disabled child as a curse. That they feel that a disabled offspring will not be able to contribute productively. That she would be an undue burden. And that there is a need to have an able-bodied child to compensate for this deficit. However, the existence of this thought process is a reason for us to fight tooth and nail against any attempts to codify these beliefs into law. We must do everything we can to interrogate, contest and dismantle this type of thinking. Not put our weight behind those who seek to legitimize it by inscribing it into law. In other words, the ground realities that one member speaks of are the very reason why we should fight back against this provision. Fifth, as another member points out, the selfsame arguments that are being deployed to support this provision have been used in the past to support attempts to kill the girl child. Many facts of life that confront us in everyday life are horrendous and unfortunate. That is no reason to defend a law that seeks to sanction these unfortunate realities. Sixth, as disabled people who strive everyday to realize our full potential and to break down the barriers standing in our way, it is profoundly sad that some of us are willing to unhesitatingly subscribe to the stereotypes that this provision embodies. Do we really think that a disabled life matters less? That a disabled person cannot contribute productively? That they cannot do as well as, if not surpass, their able-bodied siblings? To the extent that this is so, isn't the society we inhabit also to blame for the disabled not realizing their full potential? Lastly, granted, some children may actually be born with disabilities that are so severe and limiting that they may not be able to lead lives of productivity or a life without significant pain. Even if we accept for a moment that a deviation from the two child norm would be okay in such cases, that is not what this bill does. The provision does not deal with disabilities meeting such a high bar. It applies to those with all 21 disabilities covered by the 2016 Act, irrespective of their impact on the disabled child. I will conclude with the painful observation that the ableism displayed by the disabled sometimes surpasses that exhibited by the able-bodied. With friends like these, who needs enemies? Rahul -- Disclaimer: 1. Contents of the mails, factual, or otherwise, reflect the thinking of the person sending the mail and AI in no way relates itself to its veracity; 2. AI cannot be held liable for any commission/omission based on the mails sent through this mailing list.. Search for old postings at: http://www.mail-archive.com/accessindia@accessindia.org.in/ --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "AccessIndia" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to accessindia+unsubscr...@accessindia.org.in. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/accessindia.org.in/d/msgid/accessindia/000501d77c15%24d135a430%2473a0ec90%24%40gmail.com.
