This is a column about abortion.

I know what you’re thinking. “Here we go, she’s going to go on a pro-life or pro-choice rant for 600 words. This is old news.” And here’s the part where you look across the page and judge whether or not you have time to skim this before class.

Trust me when I say you may want to. Because I’m not talking about the traditional abortion debate that goes on here in the United States, the one that has citizens and politicians chasing their tails in a never-ending argument.

The conclusion that a recent census in India came to is far more black and white than the current debate in America. And even those who generally shy away from any involvement in discussion on the “starts with a, rhymes with shmashmorshmon” debate should pay attention.

The Indian census found there are far fewer females born each year than males. The trend has been present since the early 2000s, but is now spreading to areas formerly unaffected.

There is reason to believe the statistics are the way they are on purpose. Many researchers point to aspects of Indian culture that believe girls are more of a burden on the family than boys as the reason for the selective abortions of females, according to a story on National Public Radio’s “All Things Considered.”

Using ultrasound technology to determine the sex of the child early on during pregnancy, the parents decide whether to abort the pregnancy based on the results.  The term for this
disturbing procedure is female feticide, a procedure predominantly seen in northern parts of India hat is rapidly making its way south.

When I heard this story on the radio as I got ready for class, I could hardly believe it. In the city of Jhajjar (a little to the northwest of New Delhi), lies the Sarvodya School, where girls make up only 30 percent of total enrollment.

I listened as principal Punit Sharma explained that the low percentage might come from reluctance on the part of the families to educate daughters. However, he believes the startling number is more likely a result of the low number of girls in Jhajjar’s population.

As awful as the immediate consequences of female feticide are, the long run looks even worse for the people of India. Sharma pointed out that young men are having a harder time seeking out young women to marry in Jhajjar in recent years. Even as schools make efforts to teach men to see women as equals in the classroom, the low female population leads to these larger societal issues.

The growing population gap is just now catching interest internationally in addition to social implications. Although an immediate fix is next to impossible, long-term goals to deal with the issue of female feticide are in the works.

Public awareness and stricter legal enforcement are two ways the Centre for Social Research, an organization based out of New Delhi, has identified as a means to end the injustice. Although the practice of selective abortion is one that has been around for decades, the effects are somewhat recent, and not as well known as they should be.

If you are interested in learning more about female feticide and its effects on the Indian population, I urge you to pick up “Petals in the Dust: India’s Missing Girls.” This thorough documentary combines research with personal stories that shed more light on the problem than the length of this column allows.

This issue, regardless of your opinion on abortion, is one that both requires and demands your attention. Rapid global population growth a constant concern, so it’s important to remember that female feticide is a slippery slope. With barely any enforcement of legal regulations regarding the practice in India, other countries may see female feticide as a means to control their own populations, which will only build acceptance for this inhumane action.

Just recognizing the impact of the practice is a step to make sure that female feticide doesn’t become a worldwide practice.