Oh! To be born and educated

--Leena Mehendale[1], IAS

The fast declining rate of female to male sex ratio as has been brought to the fore in the latest census of 2001 has created a wide- spread alarm among the government circles, the voluntary sector and academicians all over the country. There is no doubt that this kind of decline is not natural but is a result of rampant sex detection tests and female foeticides, thanks to the advances made by medical profession. For the first time, the sex ratio for children under 6 years ( 927) has gone below the All India average of 932 for all age groups. As part of my private study on crime against women, I thought it worthwhile to study the relationship between fmr and female literacy.

Apparently it would be expected that fmr should increase with increase in education. The actual trends are quite the reverse. Two scatter graphs plotting female literacy rates vs fmr for children below the age of 6 (fmr_6) for Orissa and Kerala in fig 1 and 2 below are typical examples of this trend. These two scatter diagrams depict very clearly, that districts having higher literacy rates among females have lower fmr_6. This is almost as if women must be denied either the right to be educated, if not, then the very right to be born. Or, is it as if better access to education which is supposed to bring modernization, liberation, economic productivity and awareness about rights of women has, as the first consequence, bound women more firmly to the patriarchic values of male–child-preference by helping them to access the required medical care without compunction?

FIG : Orissa and Kerala

The enormity of the situation strikes harder by the comparison of the two states. In Orissa, the lowest literacy rate is 18 in the district of Nabarangpur. There onward, the right to education has improved but the right to be born has declined. In Kerala, the lowest literacy rate is as high as 70 in Kasargod district. And yet the denial of right to be born keeps getting more glaring as the right to education improves.

The reason for comparing fmr_6 rather than overall fmr is obvious. Firstly, the overall fmr may be skewed for reasons such as migration of male labourers. Secondly, if there has been a deliberate selective abortion of female foetus during the last decade, then the same will be reflected more clearly in the sex ratio for children rather than for adults.

An even sharper comparison can be made if the figures of fmr_1, that is children below the age of 1 are available. In fact, these figures are available with the anganwadi workers and up to the district level. Beyond that level however, they are not compiled gender-wise. The women and child development department can look into this aspect.

Two things need to be said about the above observation. Firstly, it is not to suggest any cause and effect relationship between higher female literacy and a decline in fmr. Over the past decade, just as educational facilities have been extended to far flung areas, covering larger children population, so have the medical facilities extended especially in private sector, making foetus-sex determination and termination of pregnancy an easier, safer and quicker job. The male-child preference which had always existed has been reinforced by the availability of the medical techniques. The important point to be made here is that increase in literacy levels was not sufficient to counteract these tendencies.

Sadly enough, the same inverse proportionality between fmr_6 and female literacy is also seen in Himachal, Rajasthan, West Bengal, Haryana, Gujrat, UP, Uttaranchal, Assam, and Jharkhand. A scatter graph for all the 593 districts in the country is shown below. It has a V shape, so I found it more convenient to divide it into 4 zones namely lower, left, central and right zones in order to compare the situation across the country.

Fig. 3, 4, 5 : Relationship of fmr_6 vs. female lit. All –India, lower zone and right zone

It is worthwhile to take a detailed look at these zones. How do various societies recognize, respect and uphold the right to be born and to be educated and who deny them and how?

Chart 1 gives “at a glance” how various districts are distributed among these zones across all the states in the country.

state	districts	lower	left	central	right	na	state ave
Punjab	17	17					793
Haryana	19	19					820
Chandigarh	1	1					845
Delhi	9	8			1		865
Gujarat	25	16	5	2	1	x	879
Himachal Pradesh	12	5		5	1	x	897
Uttaranchal	13	1	1	9	2		906
Rajasthan	32	12	17	3			909
Uttar Pradesh	70	25	41	4			915
Maharashtra	35	9	1	17	8		917
Daman & Diu	2			1	1		925
Madhya Pradesh	45	4	22	19			933
goa	2				2		933
Jammu & Kashmir	14	2	10	2			937
Bihar	37	3	33	1			938
Tamil Nadu	30	4		14	12		939
Karnataka	27		7	16	4		949
Orissa	30		13	15	2		950
pondicheri	4			1	3		958
Arunachal Pradesh	13		10	3			961
manipur	9		1	7	1		961
West Bengal	18		4	11	3		963
kerala	14				14		963
Andhra Pradesh	23		12	9	2		964
Assam	23		5	17	1		964
a&n island	2			1	1		965
Jharkhand	18		15	3			966
mizoram	8		1		7		971
Dadra Nagar Haveli	1		1				973
lakshadweep	1				1		974
Chhatisgarh	16		5	11			975
meghalaya	7		2	4	1		975
Nagaland	8		2	3	3		975
tripura	4			3	1		975
sikkim	4			4			986
total	593	126	208	185	72	2	927

Lower zone:

These are 126 districts having fmr_6 lower than 900 (see chart 4). Out of these 34 are far worse than the remaining as their fmr_6 ratio are less than 820. These are: all 17 from Punjab, 13 from Haryana 3 from Gujrat and 1 from J & K
Census commissioner may quickly release the data for children below the age of 1 year for these 126 districts, because they need to be watched out. Especially the worst 33 districts need monitoring on a month to month basis in respect of registration of clinics and more frequent sample surveys.
Fateh garh Sahib in Punjab stands out with lowest fmr_6 in the country, which is only 754.
How many districts from which state contribute to this zone?

All 17 of Punjab, Chandigarh, all 19 of Haryana, 8 out of 9 districts of Delhi,

5 out of 12 from Himachal, 16 out of 25 of Gujrat, 12 out of 32 from Rajasthan,

9 out of 35 from Maharashtra, and 25 out of 70 in UP contribute to this phenomenon. Minor additions are from Bihar, J&K, MP, Tamilnadu and Uttaranchal.

Some villages of Rajasthan, Punjab, and Gujrat take pride in “no barat being received” there. The male and female child population figures for children below 6 and children below 1 in respect of these villages should be released as a special case.

Many states have as yet, not reached such alarming decline in the female to male sex ratio. There are however, 98 more districts with fmr between 900 to 930 (the All India average being 927). They must watch out and take more effective steps to prevent the female foeticides.
Punjab fmr_6 figures range from 754 to 819 even though female literacy ranges between 35 to 70 which is well above that in some states like Bihar.
A separate group of 29 districts stands out where fmr_6 is above 850 but literacy rates are less than 40. They are mostly from UP, Rajasthan and Bihar.

left zone:

In addition to above 29, these are 206 other districts having fmr_6 above 900, but literacy rates ranging from 10 to 40. Here is the denial of right to education, even as low as mere literacy. The schemes for primary education need more vigorous implementation here.
Major contributor states are JK --11 out of 14, MP -- 22 out of 45, Jharkhand-- 16 out of 19, Rajasthan—18, Orissa-- 13, UP – 25, Arunachal-- 11, and Andhra—12.

Chart 2 : 20 districts with lowest female literacy ( below 20% )

State	dist	F-lit	fmr_6	state	dist	F-lit	fmr_6
Bihar	Kishanganj	14	941	Jharkhand	Garhwa	18	960
Uttar Pradesh	Shrawasti	15	941	Uttar Pradesh	Bahraich	18	968
Jharkhand	Pakaur	16	968	Bihar	Purnia	19	968
Bihar	Supaul	17	921	Bihar	Katihar	19	966
Chhatisgarh	Dantewada	17	1014	Bihar	Purba Champaran	20	934
Uttar Pradesh	Balrampur	17	961	Madhya Pradesh	Jhabua	20	970
Orissa	Nabarangapur	17	1002	Uttar Pradesh	Budaun	20	887
Bihar	Araria	17	967	Bihar	Saharsa	20	900
Orissa	Malkangiri	18	990	Orissa	Rayagada	20	983
Bihar	Madhepura	18	918	Bihar	Pashchim Champaran	20	942

The average female literacy for the country is 46%. Bihar, Jharkhand, UP, J&K, Arunachal, Rajasthan, MP, Chattisgarh, orissa Andhra and Dadra-NagarHaveli have lower average rates than this.

Central zone:

The All –India average of female literacy at 46 % and fmr_6 at 927 obviously lies in this zone.
South Sikkim district with the two rates at 51 and 1036 stands out as a “Bindiya” on the scatter graph. This is merely a geometrical coincidence but amusing.
West Bengal, Manipur, Uttaranchal, Maharashtra, Tamilnadu,Karnatak, Assam and Chhattisgarh can be termed as central zone states.

right zone :

With literacy rates above 60 and fmr_6 above 900, these 72 districts seem to give a better treatment to women.
Chart 2 gives the districts with fmr_6 greater than 1000. As poited out by Agnihotri, this is however, not always an indication of better social awakening. Except in Mokokchung and south Sikkim, this could mean adverse living conditions because male children are biologically more prone to them.

Chart 3 : 11 districts where fmr_6 is above 1000.

Sikkim	South	51	1036
Arunachal Pradesh	Upper Siang	31	1018
Jammu & Kashmir	Pulwama	31	1015
Chhatisgarh	Bastar	27	1014
Chhatisgarh	Dantewada	17	1014
Arunachal Pradesh	East Kameng	23	1011
Jammu & Kashmir	Kupwara	22	1010
Manipur	Senapati	39	1007
Nagaland	Mokokchung	74	1004
Orissa	Nabarangapur	17	1002
Jammu & Kashmir	Anantnag	27	1001
Jammu & Kashmir	Badgam	24	1000

All districts of Kerala, Goa, Lakshadweep, Mizoram, Pondichery, 12 districts from

Tamilnadu and 8 from Maharashtra come in this zone and yet the graph of Kerala indicates that complacency can dangerously affect the fundamental rights of women, namely, to be born and educated.

The best districts are, Mokokchu-(N), Serchhip-(M), Kasargod-(K), Aizwal-(M),

Mallapur-(K), Idukki-(K), Champhai-(M), Wokha-(N), Nilgiris-(T), Karaikal-(P),and Lakshadweep-(L) which have a better fmr_6 and better female literacy.

After the enactment of PNDT Act in 1994 various state governments have yet to declare an Appropriate Authority in every district who can register the ultrasound and abortion clinics and monitor if any doctor is conducting pre- natal sex- selection tests and carrying out female foetus abortions. Only in a few isolated cases medical professionals have been taken to task for performing these tests and abortions. Newspapers carrying out open advertisements are not taken to task by the government. Supreme Court, in one PIL matter had to “order” the government to appoint appropriate authorities. More importantly, the present PNDT Act talks of banning only such techniques which were then prevalent. With the advances in science, new techniques keep coming and often a legalistic plea is taken that the PNDT Act cannot deal with them. Perhaps the Act can be renamed as sex imbalance prevention Act so that even future methods can be dealt with effectively.

This also shows that merely making enactments is not sufficient. Merely appointing personnel will also not be sufficient. The medical professionals themselves have to shed their “business outlook” and act in a more responsible manner.

Despite the enormous dangers of such an adverse male- female ratio, and the fact that medical professionals are the first to understand it, despite the oath that every doctor takes to protect the human life, despite all the much tomtomed Ethical Committees and Medical Associations, we have yet to see an ultrasound clinic or a gynecologist who refrains from being a party to this “medically introduced” phenomenon, and takes pride in not being instrumental to it and has courage to openly display her/his pride by putting up a board outside the clinic. Any such honest display will achieve far better results than all the seminars and stage talks, so often resorted to by IMA and such other bodies. Instead the gynaecologists are busy telling people that abortion is not prohibited or punishable, so they have no role to play in any plan of action.

Recently, an attempt has been made to involve religious leaders. No religious leader has yet started to persue the subjects of either lower fmr or lower female literacy as a personal mission.

An All-India map showing district wise distribution shows that 3 trends are running throught the country: In the west, with Punjab as epicenter we get a spread of districts where fmr6 is lower than 900, or 910 (this gives contiguity in the map) or 930. These are Punjab, Hartna, chandigarh, Delhi, Rajasthan, Gujrat Maharashtra, J&K and HP. On east, with Bihar as epicenter we get a spread of districts with female literacy below 20 or 30 or 40.These districts are in Bihar, UP, MP, North- Eastern states, Orissa, Andhra. In the south we have a spread of districts from Kerala, Karnatak and Tamil nadu where both the situations re better except in the Salem- Madurai belt of Tamilnadu. In UP, Jharkhand and Bihar if a district is not in the low literacy zone, it is invariably in the low fmr6 zone and vice- versa.

All this only shows that women activism has a long way to go.

Chart 4: 126 districts with the worst fmr_6 (below 900)

state	dist	fmr_6	state	dist	fmr_6	state	dist	fmr_6
Punjab	Fatehgarh Sahib	754	H P	Una	839	Gujarat	Kheda	880
Haryana	Kurukshetra	770	Gujarat	Rajkot	844	Uttar Pradesh	Hathras	881
Punjab	Patiala	770	Delhi *	South West	845	Delhi *	New Delhi	882
Punjab	Kapurthala	775	Chandigarh *	Chandigarh	845	Rajasthan	Sikar	882
Punjab	Gurdaspur	775	Uttar Pradesh	Baghpat	847	Uttar Pradesh	Mainpuri	883
Punjab	Mansa	779	Uttar Pradesh	Agra	849	Maharashtra	Satara	884
Punjab	Bathinda	779	M P	Gwalior	849	H P	Bilaspur	884
Punjab	Amritsar	783	Maharashtra	Sangli	850	Maharashtra	Aurangabad	884
Haryana	Sonipat	783	Uttar Pradesh	Ghaziabad	851	Bihar	Darbhanga	885
Haryana	Ambala	784	J & K	Kathua	851	Uttar Pradesh	Jalaun	885
Punjab	Sangrur	784	Uttaranchal	Hardwar	852	Gujarat	Bhavnagar	886
Haryana	Kaithal	789	Rajasthan	Ganganagar	852	Uttar Pradesh	Jhansi	886
Punjab	Rupnagar	791	Delhi *	North West	854	Uttar Pradesh	Aligarh	886
Haryana	Rohtak	796	Uttar Pradesh	Meerut	854	Delhi *	South	886
Punjab	Jalandhar	797	Uttar Pradesh	Gautam B Nagar	855	Uttar Pradesh	Budaun	887
Gujarat	Mahesana	798	Haryana	Faridabad	856	Gujarat	Surendranagar	888
Haryana	Yamuna nagar	800	Uttar Pradesh	Muzaffarnagar	857	Rajasthan	Alwar	888
Haryana	Jhajjar	805	Delhi *	West	858	Maharashtra	Ahmadnagar	890
Punjab	Faridkot	805	Rajasthan	Dhaulpur	859	Uttar Pradesh	Etah	891
Punjab	Muktsar	807	Maharashtra	Kolhapur	859	Tamil Nadu	Theni	893
Haryana	Panipat	807	Gujarat	Patan	862	Gujarat	Jamnagar	894
Haryana	Karnal	808	Haryana	Gurgaon	863	Gujarat	Amreli	894
Punjab	Nawanshahr	810	H P	Hamirpur	864	Uttar Pradesh	Saharanpur	894
Punjab	Hoshiarpur	810	Uttar Pradesh	Kanpur Nagar	865	Uttar Pradesh	Etawah	895
Gujarat	Ahmadabad	814	Uttar Pradesh	Shahjahanpur	866	Tamil Nadu	Namakkal	896
Haryana	Mahendragarh	814	Rajasthan	Jhunjhunun	867	Uttar Pradesh	Mahoba	896
Haryana	Rewari	814	Maharashtra	Jalgaon	867	Bihar	Sitamarhi	896
Punjab	Ludhiana	815	Rajasthan	Jaisalmer	867	Rajasthan	Jaipur	897
J & K	Jammu	816	Delhi *	North East	867	Uttar Pradesh	Mau	897
Gujarat	Gandhinagar	816	Uttar Pradesh	Bulandshahar	868	Gujarat	Porbandar	897
Haryana	Jind	818	Delhi *	East	868	Maharashtra	Solapur	897
Haryana	Sirsa	818	Delhi *	North	870	Maharashtra	Bid	898
Punjab	Moga	819	Gujarat	Surat	872	Uttar Pradesh	Auraiya	898
Punjab	Firozpur	819	Uttar Pradesh	Mathura	872	Maharashtra	Mumbai	898
Tamil Nadu	Salem	826	Rajasthan	Hanumangarh	873	Gujarat	Junagadh	898
M P	Bhind	829	Gujarat	Anand	874	Uttar Pradesh	Kanpur Dehat	899
M P	Morena	829	M P	Datia	875	Uttar Pradesh	Bareilly	899
Haryana	Hisar	830	Rajasthan	Bharatpur	875	H P	Solan	900
Haryana	Fatehabad	830	Gujarat	Vadodara	875	Uttar Pradesh	S Ravidas Nagar	900
H P	Kangra	836	Rajasthan	Karauli	876	Bihar	Saharsa	900
Haryana	Panchkula	837	Tamil Nadu	Dharmapuri	878	Rajasthan	Dausa	900
Haryana	Bhiwani	838	Gujarat	Sabar Kantha	878	Rajasthan	Sawai Madhopur	900

Legend:

red : fmr6 < 900, and 910

orange fmr6 < 930

pink F-lit < 20, 30, 40

yellow fmr6 and F_lit < 950 and 50

green x yellow either is lower

green fmr6 and F-lit > 950 and 50

blue fmr6 and F-lit > 970 and 60

[Synopsis: The census of 2001 has brought out that for the first time, the sex ratio for children under 6 years ( 927) has gone below the sex- ratio for total population ( 932); this being largely the effect of female foeticide. Similarly, despite all efforts, the female literacy has remained low in some states. This article aims at statistical analysis and mapping of those districts where either the right to be born or the right to be educated or both are denied to the girl child. Is there a correlation? Some of the observations are: (1) Fateh- garh Saheb district in Punjab has lowest fmr_6, namely 754. All districts of Punjab, and two- thirds of haryana have fmr_6 lower than 820. (2) With Punjab as epicenter, there is a continuous stretch encompassing Haryana, Delhi, Gujrat, Rajasthan, Maharashtra and western UP that needs to be watched out for low fmr. Policies like gender –desegregated census analysis of children below 1 year, more frequent census, village –wise analysis and stricter registration of ultra- sonography clinics need to be persued. (3) In the east, with Bihar as epicenter, there is a continuous stretch encompassing the districts of Bihar, Jkharkhand, eastern UP, Assam, Orissa, MP, and Andhra where female literacy is low and the efforts for girl-child education need to be strengthened. (4) Many states show a typical trend wherein the districts with higher female literacy have lower fmr_6. This points to a need for paradigm shift in our educational value system.]

Average f-lit of states:

state	2001mlit	2001flit	state	2001mlit	2001flit
Bihar	49	27	West Bengal	67	52
Jharkhand	56	32	Manipur	68	52
D&NHaveli *	61	35	Sikkim	66	52
Uttar Pradesh	57	35	Nagaland	62	53
Jammu & Kashmir	57	36	Punjab	66	56
Arunachal Pradesh	53	36	Tripura	71	57
Rajasthan	62	36	Tamil Nadu	73	58
Madhya Pradesh	63	42	Maharashtra	74	58
Chhatisgarh	65	44	Himachal Pradesh	73	59
Orissa	65	44	Daman & Diu *	78	60
Andhra Pradesh	62	45	Delhi *	75	64
INDIA	64	46	A&N islands	76	65
Assam	60	47	Pondicherry *	78	66
Haryana	67	48	Chandigarh *	76	67
Gujarat	66	48	Goa	79	68
Meghalaya	53	48	Lakshadweep *	80	69
Karnataka	66	50	Mizoram	77	72
Uttaranchal	71	51	Kerala	83	78

[1] The author is joint secretary to government of India working with National Commission for Women. This article is a part of her private study of Crimes Against Women in India.