A STUDY OF ETHICAL AND LEGAL CHALLENGES IN LEGALISING PASSIVE EUTHANASIA IN INDIA

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.