I always thought women had control over their bodies and had the right to choose. The judge in India decided the wife's decision to have an abortion without her husband's consent amounted to cruelty.

In normal circumstances, a woman would discuss the possibility of abortion with her husband or partner, although she would still have the final say. In this case, the husband and wife lived separately for over eight years out of a 14-year marriage. There didn't seem to be much time to discuss the situation.

I'd like to know when the abortions took place. Was the couple in a continual relationship despite living apart? The court noted that there were numerous feuds between the parties over "trivial matters." The judge mentioned the allegation that the wife took money and jewelry from the husband's parents.

I don't buy the court's rationale. This fuzzy reasoning was also found in my earlier report of an Indian judge who granted a husband a divorce because his wife was HIV-positive. In the abortion case, the wife claims the charges were concocted and not true. She was interested in returning to her matrimonial home and didn't want to divorce.

A divorce decision because of a unilateral abortion is unacceptable. Here in the US, the Pennsylvania law requiring a wife to notify her husband of her intention to secure an abortion was struck down in 1992. It was deemed unconstitutional after the lawsuit of Planned Parenthood v. Casey. This law would have required a written statement from the husband saying he was aware his spouse was seeking an abortion.

Can you imagine waiting for that statement? What about wives who are abused and battered? No civilized society should impose such a burden on women. Courts in India need to learn this lesson.