Legal prohibition alone cannot change deep-rooted son preference in Indian society. Critically analyse this statement in the context of BBBP and the PC&PNDT Act.

Son preference in India is rooted in patrilineal inheritance, dowry and old-age security expectations. The PC&PNDT Act, 1994 legally prohibits sex selection before or after conception [3], yet a declining child sex ratio in Census 2011 compelled the launch of Beti Bachao Beti Padhao (2015) — evidence that prohibition needs a social counterpart, though law remains indispensable.

Why legal prohibition alone is insufficient

• The Act regulates supply (clinics, ultrasound machines, record-keeping) but leaves untouched the demand created by son preference [3].
• Enforcement is district-administration dependent; violations are private transactions between family and provider, making detection difficult.
• Sex selection is only the entry point — discrimination continues post-birth through nutrition, healthcare and schooling neglect, which no penal statute can reach.

BBBP as the behavioural complement

• Built on three objectives: prevent gender-biased sex selection, ensure survival and protection of the girl child, ensure her education [1] — a life-cycle approach beyond the pre-natal stage.
• Works through mindset change — informing, influencing and mobilising communities — with tri-ministerial convergence (WCD, Health, Education) [1].
• Measurable movement: national Sex Ratio at Birth rose from 918 (2014-15) to 930 (2023-24), and girls' secondary GER from 75.51% to 78% in the same period [1].

Persisting limitations

• Expenditure has been advocacy-heavy, with limited direct outlay on girls' health and schooling.
• Now a 100% centrally funded component under the SAMBAL vertical of Mission Shakti, extended to all districts [1][2] — wider coverage, but weaker district-specific targeting of low-CSR pockets.
• Awareness campaigns cannot dismantle dowry or exclusion of daughters from inheritance in practice.

Law and social mobilisation are therefore complements, not substitutes: PC&PNDT supplies deterrence, BBBP supplies legitimacy for that deterrence. A decade of implementation [4] suggests the way forward lies in tighter PC&PNDT enforcement paired with women's property rights, social security and school retention — converting the constitutional promise of Articles 14, 15(3) and 39 into lived equality.