| dc.description.abstract | One of the controversial issues in the recent past has been the question of legalizing the
right to die or Euthanasia. ‘Right to life’ includes the right to live with human dignity
which would mean the existence of such right up to the end of natural life which
includes the right of a dying man to die with dignity. But the ‘right to die with dignity’
is not to be confused with the ‘right to die’ an unnatural death curtailing the natural
span of life. Hence, the concept of right to life is central to the debate on the issue of
Euthanasia. Euthanasia is controversial since it involves the deliberate termination of
human life. Patient suffering from terminal diseases is often faced with great deal of
pain as the diseases gradually worsens until it kills them and this may be so frightening
for them that they would rather end their life than suffering it. So the question remains
whether people should be given assistance in killing themselves, or whether they should
be left to suffer the pain caused by terminal illness. Passive euthanasia is when the
patient dies due to non-performance of something necessary to keep the patient alive or
when abstaining from doing something that is required in keeping the patient alive
which includes switching off life-support system, withdrawal of feeding tube, not
opting for life-extending operation or life-extending drugs. The Courts in India have
time and again been grappled by the issue of permitting a person to die or not.
The answer to some extent came through the landmark judgement in Aruna
Ramchandra Shanbaug where the Supreme Court of India responded to the plea for
euthanasia filed by Aruna’s friend journalist Pinki Virani, by setting up a medical panel
to examine her. The three-member medical committee subsequently set up under the
Supreme Court’s directive, checked upon Aruna and concluded that she met “most of
the criteria of being in a permanent vegetative state”, but turned down the mercy killing
petition. The Apex Court in its landmark judgement, however allowed passive
euthanasia in India.
In Aruna Shanbaug and Gian Kaur cases, the Supreme Court has stated that the law
currently only permits passive euthanasia. The administration of active euthanasia or
assisted suicide would constitute attempts to commit or abet suicide under the Indian
Penal Code, 1860. However, in both these judgments, the court stated explicitly that
iv
assisted suicide was only illegal in the absence of a law permitting it. Therefore,
assisted suicide could be legalised if legislation was passed by Parliament to that effect. | en_US |
