In a series of landmark judgements, the Supreme Court has given legal sanction to passive euthanasia, permitting ‘living will’ by patients on withdrawing medical support if they slip into irreversible coma.
The Supreme Court said that a person cannot be made to suffer indefinitely in a state of come, when he or she does not have the wish to continue living. This might be a corollary to the Constitutional Right to Life. Just as you can live with dignity, so the court has allowed a person to die with dignity when there is no scope for reversal of condition.
In the famous Aruna Shanbaug case of 2011, the Supreme Court had passed a judgement by which it had permitted withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment from patients not in a position to make an informed decision.
Image Credit: washingtonpost
The present ruling is cause of a petition filed by an NGO ‘Common Cause’, who had approached the court seeking a direction for recognition of ‘living will’ and contended that when a medical expert said that a person afflicted with terminal disease had reached a point of no return, then she should be given the right to refuse being put on life support.
So, what is passive euthanasia?
Passive euthanasia is a condition where there is withdrawal of medical treatment with the deliberate intention to hasten the death of a terminally-ill patient.
How is passive euthanasia made legal, and how is the decision taken?
It is made legal with a living will, which is a written document that allows a patient to give explicit instructions in advance about the medical treatment to be administered when he or she is terminally-ill or no longer able to express informed consent.
Though the Indian government has rejected the concept in principle, it has framed a law that is in the making. It has appointed a committee to look into the draft law.
The question of Euthanasia is a highly controversial issue. It is rife with moral, ethical, medical and legal conundrums. Can you depend on an ill and infirm mind to decide the question of its life? Also, many people like to live on hope that the terminally ill will cure, and return to them. Should we abandon this hope of medical miracle when we allow passive euthanasia? There are some who argue that the limited resources should be expended on someone who actually stands a chance to recover.
It is amidst these questions, that the Supreme Court has taken the bold decision to legalise passive euthanasia. As the ethical debates will continue, atleast there will be a legal standing for those who decide to take up the option.
Read Also: I Want To Spend Time With The Couple Who Wants To Die
