Child Labour India

Poor children in India begin working at a very young and tender age. Many children have to work to help their families and some families expect their children to continue the family business at a young age.India has all along followed a proactive policy in the matter of tackling the problem of child labour. India has always stood for constitutional, statutory and developmental measures that are required to eliminate child labour in India. Indian Constitution consciously incorporated relevant provisions in the Constitution to secure compulsory universal elementary education as well as labour protection for children.
Though most children begin working at a young age due to economic reasons, doing so allows them to break from some social constraints.

Indian Government policies on Child Labour in India

India's policy on child labour has evolved over the years against this backdrop. The present regime of laws relating to Child Labor in India have a pragmatic foundation and are consistent with the International Labour Conference resolution of 1979. The policy of the government is to ban employment of children below the age of fourteen years in factories, mines and hazardous employment and to regulate the working conditions of children in other employment. The Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986 seeks to achieve this basic objective.

Child Labour Laws in India

Through a notification dated May 26, 1993, the working conditions of children have been regulated in all employment which are not prohibited under the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act. Following up on a preliminary notification issued on October 5, 1993, the government has also prohibited employment of children in occupation processes like abattoirs /slaughter houses, printing, cashewnut descaling and processing, and soldering.
Children perform a variety of jobs: some work in factories, making products such as carpets and matches; others work on plantations, or in the home.

For boys the type of work is very different because they often work long hours doing hard physical labor outside of the home for very small wages. The government has made efforts to prohibit child labor by enacting Child Labour laws in India including the 1986 Child Labor (Prohibition and Regulation) Act that stated that children under fourteen years of age could not be employed in hazardous occupations.

This act also attempted to regulate working conditions in the jobs that it permitted, and put greater emphasis on health and safety standards. However, due to cultural and economic factors, these goals remain difficult to meet. For instance, the act does nothing to protect children who perform domestic or unreported labor, which is very common in India. In almost all Indian industries girls are unrecognized laborers because they are seen as helpers and not workers. Therefore, girls are therefore not protected by the law. Children are often exploited and deprived of their rights in India, and until further measures are taken, many Indian children will continue to live in poverty.

Compiled By: Ashutosh Pandey & Pooja

Superconductivity

What is superconductivity? How was it discovered? What are the properties of superconductors, how are they applied now, and how are they likely to become widely used in the near future? These are just some of the questions...for answer these question pl mail to geet international team. our E mail ID: geetedu@gmail.com

Euthanasia दया मृत्यु

दया मृत्यु यानि Euthanasia एक ऐसी मौत है जो इन्सान खुद के लिए मांगता है। दुनिया के कई देशों में इसे बकायदा कानूनी मान्यता प्रदान है। जब इन्सान अपने जीवन से परेशान हो जाता है तो वह अपने लिए मौत कि मांग कर सकता है। लेकिन इसकी आड़ में आत्महत्या को स्वीकार नहीं किया जा सकता है। डाक्टर खुद अपनी मर्जी से किसी के लिए मौत का इंतजाम नहीं कर सकता है। दया मृत्यु में मरीज की इच्छा के चलते ही उसे मौत दीं जा सकती है। इस बारे में हम अपके विचार आमंत्रित करतें हैं। अपने विचार हमें E-mail geetedu@gmail.com पर भेंजे। सर्वश्रेष्ठ विचार को प्रकाशित किया जाएगा और मुफ़्त कोचिंग दीं जायेगी।

Is euthanasia ethical?

THIS QUESTION was the topic for regional competition of the fourth inter-institutional L. N. Birla National debate recently held at Chennai. Students from city colleges and schools, who participated in the debate, discussed this complex issue with ease and clarity. Some of the views expressed therein deserve closer scrutiny. While a few participants argued that freedom to die should be made a fundamental right, others opposed it on ethical grounds.
Legal dilemmas
Euthanasia (eu = good, thanatos = death) drew attention of Indian doctors and sociologists in April 2002, when the Dutch Parliament legalised it (actually in practice there for two decades) making the Netherlands the only country in the world to do so. Earlier, Oregon became the only State in the U.S. to pass the "Death with Dignity Act" in 1997 enabling patients to administer lethal injections themselves. Here the patient (instead of doctor) practises euthanasia with legal sanction.
Euthanasia is of three types: active (sticking a lethal injection), passive (withdrawing of life support systems) and death by double effect (through heavy doses of pain killers hastening the end). Any one of the above is in vogue in many countries.
The Hindu editorially observes (April 21, 2002): "Surveys in European countries indicate that many thousands of people are routinely assisted to die by doctors in one of the two latter ways every year."
In certain cases, there is the seal of approval too. For instance, recently a U.K. family court granted the right to die to a 43-year old woman, paralysed from the neck downwards, who wanted to have her ventilator switched off.
This is yet another case of granting legal sanction to passive euthanasia, a judicial exemption to the law of land. Similarly, in Columbia doctors are not held responsible if they followed terminally ill patient's request for mercy killing. Among the proponents of euthanasia, Dr. Jack Kevorkian (known as Dr. Death) who claimed that he had helped more than 130 people die since 1990 is unique. In an extreme case, he not only administered the lethal injection to Thomas Youk suffering from a wasting disease, but also made a "60 minute TV programme" of the process. Terming this as audacious, Judge Jessica Cooper awarded `Dr. Death' 10-25 year prison sentence for murder in April 1999 under the law of State of Michigan. Although Dr. Kevorkian styles himself as a crusader comparable to Dr. Martin Luther King, he had little support from his compeers. The American Medical Association blamed him for perverting physician-patient relationship, which weakened public trust in medical profession.People are naturally apprehensive that the ongoing happenings elsewhere will have a ripple effect in India too.
Two cases of Indian courts turning down requests of the patients to die were reported in the year 2001. The Patna High Court dismissed Tarakeshwar Chandravanshi's plea seeking mercy killing for his 25-year-old wife Kanchan, who had been comatose for 16 months. Again the Kerala High Court said no to the plea of BK Pillai, who had a disabling illness, to die. In spite of clear legal mandates, passive euthanasia, although sporadic, is prevalent in India. Here is an illustrative report from India Today (April 15, 2002):
"One case was of 59 year-old Neena Bonarji, an international bridge player who was suffering from progressive lung disease for three years and was being treated at Delhi's Ganga Ram hospital, had instructed her daughter Nisha Bhambani to put her off the ventilator when the time came. `When my mother slipped to 100 per cent supplementary support, we did what she had wished for,' says Bhambani. Within an hour, Bonarji passed away."
Although mercy killing appears morally justifiable (especially in brain dead patients whose organs can be donated to save other lives) in case of incurable diseases, doctors should be doubly careful, since they run the risk of attracting punishment for murder under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. Dr. P.K. Dave, former director of the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), New Delhi, emphasised: "even if the relatives insist, we never opt for it."
Safeguards
Euthanasia is a twin-aged weapon. While most patients who opt for mercy killing may be terminally ill with absolutely no chances of recovery, there are chances of misuse like wrong diagnosis, hallucinations of patients and collusion of patient's relatives and doctors. To tackle this problem pragmatically, all such cases should be reviewed by a panel of experts including physicians, neurologists, psychiatrists, psychologists and lawyers et al. In any case, judicial approval should be taken in all cases.

P.V.L.N. RAO
Courtesy THE HINDU for original story log on
http://www.hindu.com/op/2003/11/25/stories/2003112500341600.htm