A Brief Colonial History Of Ceylon(SriLanka)
Sri Lanka: One Island Two Nations
A Brief Colonial History Of Ceylon(SriLanka)
Sri Lanka: One Island Two Nations
(Full Story)
Search This Blog
Back to 500BC.
==========================
Thiranjala Weerasinghe sj.- One Island Two Nations
?????????????????????????????????????????????????Friday, May 26, 2017
Is There Such a Thing as an Illegal Pregnancy?
“A baby is something you carry inside you for nine months, in your arms for three years, and in your heart until your death.”… Anon
( May 25, 2017, Montreal, Sri Lanka Guardian) I was quite bemused to read, in an excellent article on abortion titled The Question of Abortion written
by Rev. Father Augustin Fernando in the Daily News that there is such a
thing as an illegal pregnancy. To quote the holy priest: “Irregular
and illegal pregnancies occurring outside of marriage could be prevented
by sufficient and orderly instruction of adolescents organised well and
carried out by capable persons. These instructors could instill the
right values to refine the sense of responsibility in young people and
to help them to be aware of the possible consequence of irresponsible
and impulsive actions especially with regard to thoughtless, spontaneous
sexual relations.
All could be instructed to avoid and abstain from indulging in a brief,
temporary pleasure that could ruin a whole life. If they understood that
sexual relations outside marriage is demeaning the integrity of a union
that is to be held chaste and sacred, they would not recklessly indulge
in it. It is the uninstructed, ingenuous and naïve persons who
subsequently feel like trapped people after having indulged in illicit
sexual activity. Even private and secret sexual relations could have
public repercussions and unexpected ramifications”.
Father Fernando’s sagacious advice cannot be questioned and I am sure he
developed his narrative from a religious context. However, The
Reverend Father ascribes to a pregnancy occurring outside the sanctity
of the institution of marriage the burden of illegality which, from a
legal and social perspective would not be sustainable. First of all,
one must look at the definitive meaning of “illegal”. Illegality means
the state of being contrary to or forbidden by law, especially criminal
law. The question then arises: “is it contrary to law to be pregnant”?
Technically speaking, pregnancy is the state of carrying a developing
embryo or fetus within the female body. This process is the result of
cohabitation between a male and female. There could be jurisdictions
where such cohabitation between unmarried persons would be prohibited by
law incurring penal or civil sanctions (for example, it is reported
that unmarried mothers have to pay a fine in China and pregnancy out of
wedlock is taboo in countries following Sharia Law). However, it would
certainly be unusual to pronounce that the carriage of a developing
embryo is per se and per force illegal.
If pregnancy were to be considered illegal, it is inevitable that such a
condition would come under some form of sanction. On the contrary, The
Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA) of the United States prohibits
discrimination based on pregnancy in the context of any aspect of
employment, including hiring, firing, pay, job assignments, promotions,
layoff, training, fringe benefits, such as leave and health insurance,
and any other term or condition of employment. The Act goes on to say:
“if a woman is temporarily unable to perform her job due to a medical
condition related to pregnancy or childbirth, the employer or other
covered entity must treat her in the same way as it treats any other
temporarily disabled employee. For example, the employer may have to
provide light duty, alternative assignments, disability leave, or unpaid
leave to pregnant employees if it does so for other temporarily
disabled employees”. Also, a woman cannot be fired in the civilized
world for being pregnant.
These measures of ensuring the dignity of pregnancy – no matter what the
circumstances are in its occurrence – have been adopted for one
reason, and that is to recognize the sanctity of human life carried
within the womb of the mother. If it were otherwise, a disturbing
conundrum that would emerge both from a social and legal context is that
if pregnancy were to be considered illegal, one could argue that the
remedy could lie in aborting the fetus. In the 1973 case of Roe v. Wade
which granted women the right to terminate an unwanted pregnancy, based
on an implicit fundamental right to privacy upon a decision handed
down by the Supreme court of the United States, the following conditions
were laid down for an abortion to take place: In the first trimester,
the state (that is, any government) could treat abortion only as a
medical decision, leaving medical judgment to the woman’s physician; in
the second trimester (before viability), the state’s interest was seen
as legitimate when it was protecting the health of the mother; after
viability of the fetus (the likely ability of the fetus to be able to
survive outside and separated from the uterus), the potential of
human life could be considered as a legitimate state interest, and the
state could choose to “regulate, or even proscribe abortion” as long as
the life and health of the mother was protected.
The above notwithstanding and legality aside, pregnancy out of wedlock
often leads to social ostracism especially affecting the mother. The
literature of the early nineteenth century brings in a mixed bag, where
in certain black communities in the United States, although such a
condition was frowned upon, societies came together to look after the
unwed mother. A book that resonated the puritanical social mores of
the time was Nathaniel Hawthorn’s The Scarlet Letter
where Hester Prynne, who had an adulterous relationship which results
in her pregnancy, is considered a deviant who deserved ostracism,
punishment and even violence. However, it is incontrovertible that the
responsibility of a parent, and indeed of society should not be
determined by the circumstances of the child’s conception. Psalm 127:3
says: “Behold, children are a heritage from the Lord, they are the fruit
of the womb – a reward”. Also in the Gospel of Mathew (6:14-15) it is
said: “For if you forgive others their trespasses, your heavenly Father
will also forgive you, but if you do not forgive others their
trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses”.
The bottom line is that pregnancy cannot be associated with the mother’s
guilt or innocence or presumption thereof. Neither can it be held
against the perpetrator of rape from a moral perspective (we are not
talking legalities here). The perpetrator is guilty of violating the
woman, but pregnancy is essentially and intrinsically linked to the
incipient life involved and to that extent cannot be branded either
way. As Pope Francis said: “ All
life has inestimable value even the weakest and most vulnerable, the
sick, the old, the unborn and the poor, are masterpieces of God’s
creation, made in his own image, destined to live forever, and deserving
of the utmost reverence and respect.