For every baby dumped in Namibia the country frowns upon the woman and, although her actions are condemnable, it is in our responsibility as a just society to take a holistic look at the circumstances surrounding baby dumping. What exactly is the problem and how can this problem be solved?
Baby dumping has two victims. A child whom, if not found in time loses his/her life and another child or young woman whom, if found loses her life.
The young perpetrator is prosecuted for culpable homicide and if convicted could sit for a good 10-25 years, depending on the presiding judge. This would result in a loss of livelihood for the woman-culprit, who without proper rehabilitation, reorientation and reinstatement back into the community, loses it all!
Though guilty of this barbaric and unacceptably hideous act, the voice of reason calls for a deeper look beyond the surface – the hurdle of carrying a child for nine months, the sometimes unimaginably painful labour, followed by the systematic planning on how to cowardly dump the living child.
This is not someone in a normal mental state. In the words of the philosopher Thomas Hobbes: “the source of every crime is some defect of the understanding, or some error in reasoning, or some sudden force of the passions”.
The woman – whether young or old – is but a fraction of the problem in this discourse. The actual problem is the defect in the system that allows such an “alternative” to having the child to exist. If we had to run through preventive measures like a check list, one can identify some loopholes that still leave baby dumping in its wake.
Food for thought. If we were to say let’s prevent the pregnancy: a) Are contraceptives allowed by law? Check. b) Are they readily available? Check. c) Are there modalities in place to educate people on contraceptive use? Check. d) Has there been societal uptake, i.e. is everyone free to access contraceptives without stigmatisation? Not exactly.
If we were to say: “Give the child up for adoption.” a) Is the society sensitised on the issue of adoption? Check. b) Are there adoption centres readily accessible, with clear procedures? Not exactly.
If we say: “Give the child to family member.” a) Do all women have support structures in place to facilitate this? Not exactly. b) Do all families have the financial means to take up this “solution”? Not exactly.
If we say: “Fair enough, don’t have the baby, have an abortion.” a) Are people sensitised to what an abortion involves? Not exactly; b) Does the legal framework allow for the option of abortion? Nope, not exactly.
So, based on this quick run-through of probable functional alternatives to baby dumping, one can say that the government is not exactly doing all that it can to create a conducive system to prevent the situation.
We applaud the call for a referendum on abortion by Minister of Health and Social Services Dr Haufiku. He stated instances, such as rape as a possible justification for abortion, but there are other factors too that warrant abortion, for example it is necessary to preserve the life and/or mental or physical health of the pregnant woman.
But how about economic necessity? If the woman cannot afford the child and the current system cannot absorb these children would that not be a legitimate reason to not have a child, or perhaps a factor to consider?
The concept of a referendum is all good and well, however we need to draw caution to the possibility of a tainted or religiously diffused referendum. There is great potential and possibility of religious doctrine and orthodoxy infringing on legislative reform.
Intensive education, differentiating between human rights and morality, would need to be undertaken so that the women understand what human rights are and where to draw the line with religion.
This education needs to take place to ensure proper understanding, because with every right comes responsibilities and although all human rights are not absolute, the institution of these rights cannot be restricted or curtailed based on religious moral philosophy.
Margaret Sandar, the activist who opened the first birth control clinic in the United States, once said: “No woman can call herself free who does not own and control her body. No woman can call herself free until she can choose consciously whether she will or will not be a mother.”
Such freedom needs to be supported by a legal framework. Hence the debate on abortion should not be about right or wrong, or any cultural or religious sentiment for that matter. It should be questioning whether or not the legal system in Namibia supports the reproductive rights of women.
Societal trends show us on a consistent basis that there are those who are not well served by the current status quo, so before we usher women to go face the music for their ill actions, let’s fine-tune the instrumentations in place to prevent baby dumping.
If this means calling a referendum to decide on abortion, then let us ensure that the nation understands without religious dissonance, what they would be deciding on. Let’s fix the system to prevent the loss of innocent life.
* Hallo Angala is president of the National Young Women Association.