Can Adoptive Mothers Be Denied Maternity Leave Because the Child Is Older Than Three Months?

Recently, the Supreme Court struck down the three-month age restriction for adoptive mothers under the Code on Social Security, 2020. It held that maternity benefits cannot be denied merely because the adopted child is older than three months.

In this Weekly, we will understand what the law was before, why it was challenged, and what the Supreme Court clarified about maternity rights, equality, and adoption.

What Was the Issue Before the Supreme Court?

The Supreme Court looked at whether the law restricts maternity benefits only to those women who adopted a child below the age of three months.

The provision granted twelve weeks of maternity benefit to a woman who legally adopted a child below three months of age. As a result, if a woman adopted a child older than three months, she would not receive maternity leave under the law.

Why Was This Provision Challenged?

The petitioner argued that the three-month age cap was arbitrary, discriminatory, and unconstitutional.

They contended that adoptive mothers of older children were unfairly treated differently from those adopting younger children. It was further argued that the need for bonding, caregiving, and emotional support does not end once a child crosses three months of age.

The petitioner also pointed out that adoption procedures often take time, and many children are placed with families only after they are older than three months. Therefore, the restriction defeated the very purpose of maternity protection and discouraged adoption by working women.

What Did the Supreme Court Hold?

The Supreme Court held that the three-month age limit was unconstitutional where it denied maternity benefits to adoptive mothers adopting children older than three months.

The Court ruled that the restriction violated Article 14 of the Constitution, which guarantees equality before the law, and Article 21, which protects dignity, autonomy, and the right to life.

What Is the Law Now?

The Court directed that Section 60(4) should now be interpreted to mean that a woman who legally adopts a child, or a commissioning mother, shall be entitled to maternity benefit for a period of twelve weeks from the date the child is handed over to her.

This means that adoptive mothers are entitled to maternity benefits regardless of the child’s age.

Why Did the Court Say the Age Limit Was Arbitrary?

The Court observed that there was no rational basis for distinguishing between a woman who adopted a child below three months and a woman who adopted a child above three months.

In both situations, the mother undertakes responsibilities of caregiving, emotional bonding, adjustment, and family integration. Since these responsibilities exist irrespective of the child’s age, the classification had no reasonable connection with the object of maternity law.

For this reason, the Court held that the age restriction was arbitrary.

Is Maternity Leave Only About Childbirth?

No. The Court made it clear that maternity benefits are not confined only to physical recovery after childbirth. The purpose of maternity leave also includes enabling motherhood, facilitating emotional bonding, ensuring caregiving, supporting child development, promoting family integration, and protecting the economic security of working women.

Thus, maternity leave serves broader social and constitutional purposes beyond biological childbirth.

How Did the Court View Adoption?

The Court recognised adoption as an equally valid and dignified way of forming a family. It observed that family relationships are not defined only by blood ties, but also by love, care, responsibility, emotional bonds, and shared commitment.

The Court affirmed that an adopted child is no less than a biological child in the eyes of the law.

The Court explained that reproductive autonomy is not limited only to the choice of biological childbirth. It also includes the freedom of an individual to decide how to build a family, including through adoption.

Therefore, denying maternity benefits to adoptive mothers undermines their decisional autonomy, dignity, and constitutional freedom under Article 21.

Why Is the Child’s Welfare Important in Adoption Cases?

The Court emphasised that the best interests of the child must remain a central consideration in all adoption-related matters. After adoption, a child may require emotional reassurance, a stable parental presence, time to adjust to a new home, a sense of belonging, and continuous care and support.

These needs exist whether the child is three months old or much older. Therefore, denying leave on the basis of age was contrary to child welfare principles.

What About Paternity Leave?
The Court also encouraged the Union Government to consider introducing paternity leave as a social security benefit. It recognised that childcare is a shared parental responsibility and should not fall exclusively upon women.