Mathematics Professor and New York Times Contributing Opinion Writer Manil Suri recently published his latest op-ed about abortion politics and legislation in India. In his column, Suri reacted to an amendment proposed last year by the Indian government that would allow abortions to be performed by specially trained registered nurses and licensed practitioners of traditional and alternative medicine systems. Suri analyzed the ongoing debate in India over the proposal, stating that “the real root of the tension is the government’s promotion of alternative medicine as a medically equivalent but cheaper alternative to allopathic (modern) medicine.”
Providing further context, Suri explained that, “There are legitimate concerns against giving equal status to Ayush and allopathic medicine. Although Ayush treatments can be effective in managing chronic conditions, very few are backed by scientifically rigorous evidence…Nevertheless, Ayush doctors provide invaluable services in rural and impoverished urban areas, where allopathic doctors are reluctant to practice. A long-term government goal, consistent with recommendations from the World Health Organization, is to integrate the two systems. This presents ethical and logistical challenges, so progress can be expected to be slow and marked by bouts of friction.”
Read “India’s Inverted Abortion Politics” in The New York Times.