The case, based on an appeal filed by two children and a parent of the deceased couple that had met with the accident, caused the Apex Court to modify the Delhi High Court order that had initially awarded the kin a compensation of Rs 22 lakh stating that the deceased woman was not an earning member of the family. 

The Supreme Court in turn had revised the compensation by Rs 11 lakh, bringing the new compensation to Rs 33 lakh. 

The SC bench had noted that the idea behind fixing a notional income for a homemaker’s services was essential as even though such activities might fall outside the economic analyses of nations, they do contribute to the economic well-being of a family in a tangible manner.

The case has inspired debate on various quarters.

Actor-turned-politician Kamal Haasan promised a notional income for housewives as part of his electoral campaign. Congress MP Shashi Tharoor backed Haasan’s comments, saying it was time homemakers were remunerated for their services, and deserved recognition as salaried professionals. 

Others hit back at Haasan saying women did not need a salary for looking after their own, and asked him to stop treating everything as a business. Arguments aside, even though the idea is appealing - especially to all homemakers whose contribution is rarely acknowledged  how does one even go about deciding who compensates the caretakers? Is it the senior-most earning member of the household? And how does one go about fixing variables such as the number of working hours, days of work, and leaves earned? And if at all it’s a job, who gets to set the KRAs and parameters for the assessment? Are there options for a promotion, both in pay scale and profile? And are there penalties for an uninformed leave of absence and substandard work?

Back in 2012, it was reported that the UPA government was seriously considering a proposal that would have made it mandatory for men to share a certain percentage of their monthly incomes with their wives.

The Women and Child Development Minister back then Krishna Tirath had expressed a desire to quantify the work performed by housewives. Online bulletin boards back then were rife with comments on how staggeringly uninformed this proposal was. One of the arguments was how would anyone even keep tabs on the specifics of each and every financial transaction carried out in a family? It would even lay bare many ugly truths prevalent in the home-front - a case in point being overworked and underappreciated homemakers.

It’s essential that we as a society at least begin considering the implications of such questions. And there’s a good reason for it too. The homemaker, to a great extent, ensures that some of the simplest tasks that we take for granted get executed like clockwork every morning. The breakfast and packed lunch are set, the kid(s) have been raised and rushed to the school, the dishes are done, the veggies have been ordered on time, the clothes have been laundered, the house is swept and mopped and it all seems like one happily choreographed exercise. It’s a harsh truth, but it’s essentially among the most thankless jobs in the world. Obviously, it’s impractical to put a cost on the services rendered by a homemaker. But this pandemic served as an eye-opener of sorts for many working professionals. People saw first-hand the effort it takes to balance Work-From-Home, while ensuring the family was brought together during dinner time. More members of the household learned how to navigate the kitchen and other chores. 

As a society, it’s imperative that we stop discounting what a homemaker brings to the table, and being appreciating the unsung warriors - mothers, sisters, aunts, uncles and fathers, who keep the fires in the hearth burning bright.