Syllabus: GS2/ Polity and Governance, GS4/ Ethics
Context
- The debate around the ethics and law that defines passive euthanasia was reignited after the Supreme Court dismissed the plea in Harish Rana’s case, who has been in a permanent vegetative state since 2013.
| What is Euthanasia? – Euthanasia, is referred to as mercy killing or physician-assisted death i.e. deliberately ending someone’s life, usually to relieve suffering. – Ethicists differentiate between active and passive euthanasia. Active Euthanasia – Also known as assisted suicide, it refers to deliberately and actively doing something to end a person’s life. – This is done through methods like administering a lethal injection or giving an overdose of medication. – Active euthanasia directly causes the patient’s death. It is illegal in most countries, including India. Passive Euthanasia – It involves intentionally letting a patient die by withholding artificial life support, such as a ventilator or feeding tube. – This can include removing a patient from life support or not providing treatment for a terminal illness. – Passive euthanasia is legal in some countries, including India, under specific circumstances and with proper consent. |
Status of Euthanasia in India
- In 2011, the Supreme Court for the first time recognised the legality of passive euthanasia in the case of Aruna Ramchandra Shanbaug v Union of India.
- In 2018, the Supreme Court recognised the legality of ‘passive euthanasia’ for terminally-ill patients, holding that the ‘right to die with dignity’ forms a part of the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
- The court also laid down detailed guidelines for passive euthanasia, both in cases where the patient left an ‘advance directive’ or a ‘living will’ stating that life support should be withdrawn if they fall terminally ill, and in cases where no such directive was left behind.
- Among the guidelines was the condition that the living will must be signed in the presence of two witnesses and signed by a Judicial Magistrate.
- In the case of patients without a living will, the family has to give their consent for withdrawal of life support.
- The court further eased norms for this process in January 2023.
Arguments in Favour of Euthanasia
- End of Pain: Euthanasia provides a way to relieve the intolerably extreme pain and suffering of an individual. It relieves the terminally ill people from a lingering death.
- Respecting Person’s Choice: The essence of human life is to live a dignified life and to force the person to live in an undignified way is against the person’s choice. Thus, it expresses the choice of a person which is a fundamental principle.
- Dignified Death: Article 21 of the Indian Constitution clearly provides for living with dignity. A person has a right to live a life with at least minimum dignity and if that standard is falling below that minimum level then a person should be given a right to end his life.
- Addressing Mental Agony: The motive behind this is to help rather than harm. It not only relieves the unbearable pain of a patient but also relieves the relatives of a patient from the mental agony.
Ethical Challenges
- Medical Ethics: Medical ethics call for nursing, caregiving and healing and not ending the life of the patient.
- In the present time, medical science is advancing at a great pace making even the most incurable diseases curable today.
- Moral Wrong: Taking a life is morally and ethically wrong. The value of life can never be undermined.
Concluding remarks
- Euthanasia challenges traditional views on death and medicine. Public discourse that considers religious, ethical, and cultural perspectives is crucial.
- Also there is a need for strict guidelines and safeguards are needed to prevent abuse or coercion.
- Ensuring access to quality palliative care, which focuses on comfort and symptom relief, should be a priority alongside any discussion of euthanasia.
Sources: IE
Previous article
Border Management and Development in India
Next article
News In Short-12-09-2024