Folks: I thought you can help me with your views on the following mail I had first sent to Kanchan. Subramani -----Original Message----- From: Subramani L Sent: Sunday, August 10, 2008 6:22 PM To: 'Kanchan Pamnani' Subject: Some questions for you to answer (asap) Hai Kanchan: This is regarding a story I am doing to follow up the media splash that happened during and after the Nikita Mehta case. Without getting into too much of the details (which I am sure you are following) I would like to tell you that the debate in which George (Abraham) took part in CNN-IBN and a few comments about the case on the internet seem to have taken things a bit too far. Rather than focusing on an exceptional situation of a lady pleading to abort a foetus with serious birth defects when it has grown after the permissible period of termination, people have started to confuse the issue with the survival difficulties of persons with disability. I am trying to provide some evidence that those spoke on the issue, especially those who spoke for termination don't seem to have understood the issue and have also spoken with wrong assumptions. For eg: people seem to think India is too much of a backward country for PWD's to live, which I am sure we, as PWD's can't agree entirely. Though there are roadblocks, we can workout ways of living despite difficulties. The system has provided ways to do it. AThe victory you had in the banking issue is a case in point. Despite difficulties, there is always the possibility for change. This is facilitated by favourable legal environment with the passing of PWD act. In this context, I need you comment on the entire debate. I specifically look for the following points: 1. Widening the debate on a unique situation can lead to dangerous interpretation on condition of PWDs and would unnecessarily create panic among parents expecting children and those coping with the prospects of raising a disabled child. 2. Disability in this case refers to the unique heart condition of the foetus in question and thus can't be construed as any disability, but the general portrayal of the case seem to have ignored this. 3. While casting doubts on the conditions for PWD's in this country, we can't afford to ignore the laws in place and the efforts by the NGOs to rehabilitate, support and empower persons with disability. The debate seem to have done precisely this and has also sensationalised the difficulties with scant regard for facts. 4. In the clamour surrounding disability, the debate has somewhat deviated from the original issue of extending the medical termination period which may be important in the event of the parents knowing about a foetus developing with serious or severe birth defects. Kindly respond to the points and do feel free to add your views (based on your experiences in dealing with several cases pertaining to PWD's). Warm rgds, Subramani Join Access India convention: For updates on it visit: http://accessindia.org.in/harish/convention.htm Registration is now open!
To unsubscribe send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the subject unsubscribe. To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, please visit the list home page at http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in
