Menstrual Dignity: The New Constitutional Frontier
- IJLLR Journal
- 5 hours ago
- 2 min read
Saee Deepak Rote, D.E.S. Navalmal Firodia Law College (DES Law)
ABSTRACT
The topic of menstruation has not been a focus in discussions about the constitution. Instead, it has been considered a personal issue and a matter of inconvenience to be handled privately. The effects of this silence can be seen in the lives of girls and women, whose access to education, work and equal participation in public life has been restricted due to menstrual poverty and lack of menstrual hygiene management (MHM). This article looks at the Supreme Court's decision to include menstrual hygiene as a fundamental part of the right to life and dignity under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, when read together with Article 21A and the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009.
In discussing the Court's in- depth understanding of menstrual poverty, the article shows how the lack of sanitation facilities, menstrual absorbents, water, disposal mechanisms, and awareness leads to children being absent from school and eventually dropping out. Hence, the right to education becomes just a paper promise. The Courts demand that education be meaningful, continuous, and non, discriminatory is a clear indication that we are witnessing a shift from a formalistic view of rights to a constitutional interpretation that is grounded in the lived realities of people. The judgment's intersectional lens also recognizes that children from poor families who are menstruating, and particularly children with disabilities, experience multiple forms of exclusion, thus increasing the State's constitutional obligation.
The Supreme Court establishment of menstrual health rights through its ruling demonstrates that the Supreme Court established a constitutional dignity standard which extends beyond classroom boundaries. The hygienic needs of students constitute a right that needs protection but the same rights requirements exist for women who work in all types of professional and public spaces including workplaces and courts. The law permits protective measures for individuals between 11 and 18 years old which creates an unfair boundary that treats all people who share a biological condition as if they experience a temporary educational problem. Protecting dignity at particular ages presents major challenges to Article 14 because this practice prevents adult women from accessing health and privacy rights and dignity rights which the constitution protects for minors.
