The census 2011 results had many highs. 2001-11 was the decade that saw the lowest population growth, improved sex-ratio to 940, increased literacy levels to 74% etc. But there was one dampener. It did ruffle a few feathers in me but I somehow ignored it. Barely a few days had passed and I was rattled by a report published in a financial daily which highlighted some damning statistics. I chose to ignore it again - thinking someone was playing around with numbers. But then, a few days back, I read another story. It would have been too naive to ignore this time again. It was perhaps for the third time now in less than 2 months that I had come across reports/statistics which, if looked at individually, looked like pieces of a jigsaw puzzle, but when looked at collectively, presented an all together different view. Only difference being that instead of getting a beautiful picture in the end, I rather got an ugly one.
The First Piece: Census 01-11 reported that the child (0-6 years) sex-ratio in 2011 is 914 - the lowest since independence and has declined from 927 in 2001. I checked the census figures and found that prominent laggards were - Punjab - 846, Chandigarh - 867, Haryana - 830, NCR - 866, Gujarat - 866, Maharashta - 883. Some of the better looking numbers from other major states are from AP & Karnataka - 943 each, Tamil Nadu - 946. However these numbers may also not present a healthy trend given the fact that numbers in AP and Karnataka have actually declined from 961 and 946 in 2001 respectively. In Tamil Nadu, the number pales in comparison to the adult sex-ratio of 1000.
The Second Piece: A news item appeared in 'Mint' (from where the title of the blog has also been derived) which was based on a study published in "The Lancet", world's leading general medical journal. It pointed out the inconsistencies in sex-ratio of the second-born child. While the number was a healthy 980 where the first-born is a boy, it was a dismal 840 when the first-born is a girl. When reported by Household wealth index, the difference is far more appalling. While the sex-ratio for the second-born where first-born is a girl was as high as 1080 for poorest 20% of the households, it dropped miraculously to 740 for richest 20% of the households.
The Third Piece: The third article published in 'Mint' discussed the findings (based on Census '11 data) of one of the country's foremost demographers on the heinous practice of Sex-Selective Abortion(SSA). The top 5 states leading the pack in terms of SSA abortions as a % of female births were Haryana - 13.1%, Punjab - 11.5%, Maharashtra - 7.6%, Rajasthan - 7% and Gujarat - 6.8%, when compared to a national average of 3.6%. Put simply, out of 100 girls born in Punjab and Haryana, there are more than 10 which were not allowed to be born and so on for other states.
The three pieces are so complementary to each other - The selective abortion of the female child, more so in case when its a second girl child has led to the worst child sex-ratio numbers since independence. It's not hard to imagine the ugly picture that I was talking about - That of increasing obsession with the male child. But that's just not it.
Combine these pieces with the fact that states reporting the dismal numbers have a higher literacy rate than the national average (barring AP), have a higher per capita income than most of the country, are among the fastest growing states (barring Rajasthan) and you unveil one of the darkest secrets hidden in India's underbelly - the aversion for the girl child is more prominent where it was least expected - among India's Urban, Rich and the Educated. Or as concluded by researchers at The Lancet - Higher education and income levels among families correspond paradoxically to greater female infant deaths, attributable, only to pre-natal diagnostic technologies.
The Second Piece: A news item appeared in 'Mint' (from where the title of the blog has also been derived) which was based on a study published in "The Lancet", world's leading general medical journal. It pointed out the inconsistencies in sex-ratio of the second-born child. While the number was a healthy 980 where the first-born is a boy, it was a dismal 840 when the first-born is a girl. When reported by Household wealth index, the difference is far more appalling. While the sex-ratio for the second-born where first-born is a girl was as high as 1080 for poorest 20% of the households, it dropped miraculously to 740 for richest 20% of the households.
The Third Piece: The third article published in 'Mint' discussed the findings (based on Census '11 data) of one of the country's foremost demographers on the heinous practice of Sex-Selective Abortion(SSA). The top 5 states leading the pack in terms of SSA abortions as a % of female births were Haryana - 13.1%, Punjab - 11.5%, Maharashtra - 7.6%, Rajasthan - 7% and Gujarat - 6.8%, when compared to a national average of 3.6%. Put simply, out of 100 girls born in Punjab and Haryana, there are more than 10 which were not allowed to be born and so on for other states.
The three pieces are so complementary to each other - The selective abortion of the female child, more so in case when its a second girl child has led to the worst child sex-ratio numbers since independence. It's not hard to imagine the ugly picture that I was talking about - That of increasing obsession with the male child. But that's just not it.
Combine these pieces with the fact that states reporting the dismal numbers have a higher literacy rate than the national average (barring AP), have a higher per capita income than most of the country, are among the fastest growing states (barring Rajasthan) and you unveil one of the darkest secrets hidden in India's underbelly - the aversion for the girl child is more prominent where it was least expected - among India's Urban, Rich and the Educated. Or as concluded by researchers at The Lancet - Higher education and income levels among families correspond paradoxically to greater female infant deaths, attributable, only to pre-natal diagnostic technologies.
And this disclosure couldn't have come at a more 'opportune' time - just coinciding with 2 decades of economic reforms. The last decade has truly been a spectacular one in terms of economic growth, ushering in a new era of urbanization, consumerism (thanks to swollen per capita) and knowledge economy (thanks to increased literacy levels). But the bitter truth is that although we are urbanized, we are not suave; although we are rich - we are not benevolent; although we are educated, we are not enlightened.
Rich.Educated.Primitive.
Such a shame!
Thanks , I have just been looking for info approximately this topic for a while and yours is the greatest I've discovered till now. But, what concerning the bottom line? Are you sure concerning the source? all of craigslist
ReplyDelete