Compassion and mother’s love have begun to overflow in social media following the news about a newborn wrapped lovingly being left abandoned in a train.
History books and fairy tales tell us about infants in baskets being deserted. Mothers who found caring for their children difficult put them in baskets that were let flow in rivers with the hope they would come to the hands of someone good. That was a tradition.
But, that is wrong under present-day laws. Neglecting a child, risking a child’s life and many other things get involved. But, two very simple things are clear.
First, the parents cannot afford to look after the child, and secondly, they hope the child will come to no harm and wish them well.
Taking the first thing into consideration, it is clear the child was ill-conceived. The responsibility lies with gentlemen with authoritarian powers and ethics, especially Buddhist monks and doctors, who fail to allow, or prevent, sexual education among the people.
Looking after a child is a serious socioeconomic task. We should consider the reaction by the woman’s parents, relatives and the society she lives in, when she gives birth out of wedlock. The reaction is not positive at all. Her job, future hopes and her economy and that of her lover depend on the birth of the child.
Thirdly, she is denied the right to go for an abortion if she does not need a child. The law which denies her that right, all the people who protect and speak for that law, cannot evade responsibility from that child being left abandoned.
All these factors lead to the child being abandoned in a train compartment. The responsibility of the parents is negligible, because a larger legal, cultural and ethical society has already committed the crime of risking the life of that child.
Also, their having abandoned the child with care, for all to see, demonstrates their wish for a better future for the child.
There are childless parents who look for an opportunity to adopt and lovingly care for a child. There is a very inefficient legal procedure imposed purportedly for the protection of children.
Rather than making it an offence to abandon a child like this, the state should, more importantly, prepare a mechanism to ensure the future of such children. Inability to care for a child should be accepted as a failure of the state. The state should be sensitive to those with economic or cultural difficulties. If a child should not be a burden to the parents, that child should not be a burden to the state either.
A mechanism is needed for such children to get adopted easily, without allowing their lives to be relegated and wasted at children’s homes.
Catching these helpless young couple as offenders and enforcing the law against them in the name of law will bring nothing good for anyone. Only the so-called lookers-on with ethics will have some entertainment. The law should be there for the benefit or good of someone. If the law has an adverse impact on all, that law is outdated. Of all things, humanity is the standard to follow in such an instance.
(Political & social analyst - director – Facultyofsex)
*English translation of an article published on facultyofsex.com