The persistence of son preference in India is rooted in socio-economic structures rather than mere ignorance. Discuss, with reference to recent Supreme Court observations and NFHS-5 data.

The Supreme Court's June 2026 observation on the "deep-seated patriarchal preference" for a male child [1] suggests son preference survives not from lack of awareness, but from material incentives embedded in inheritance, marriage and old-age security.

Structural, not informational, roots

• Patrilineal inheritance makes sons carriers of property and lineage; the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005 granting daughters equal coparcenary rights was a structural correction, not an awareness campaign.
• Dowry renders daughters an anticipated financial liability despite prohibition since 1961.
• Absent universal old-age security, sons serve as social insurance, reinforced by ritual duties like antyesti.

What the Supreme Court read into it

• In Dr. Ramesh v. State of Maharashtra (2026), the Court refused to treat Form F record deficiencies as clerical errors, noting sex selection persists "behind the curtains" and that strict enforcement of the PC&PNDT Act, 1994 [2] is needed until mentalities change [1].
• Enforcement itself is structurally weak: Appropriate Authorities are understaffed and reluctant to prosecute fellow practitioners — a gap MoHFW's national sensitisation meeting on strengthening the Act acknowledges [3].

NFHS-5 evidence against the "ignorance" thesis

• Overall sex ratio crossed parity at 1,020 females/1,000 males, yet rural (1,037) exceeds urban (985) [4]. The wealthier, better-educated and technologically better-served segment records the worse ratio — literacy has not dissolved preference.
• SRB improved from 819 (2016–18) to 917 (2021–23) [3], but several States remain below the national average [1] — progress is real yet geographically entrenched.

A qualified counterpoint: the small-family norm intensifies "a son at any cost," so awareness efforts under Beti Bachao Beti Padhao [5] retain value — but only alongside incentive change.

Son preference is best understood as a rational response to structures that penalise daughters; law suppresses the symptom while incentives must shift the cause. Pairing sustained PC&PNDT enforcement with property rights, pensions and girl-child savings would advance both Article 15's equality guarantee and SDG-5.