Euthanasia In India Research Articles

MOST RECENT CASES-LAWS PERTAINING TO THE EUTHANASIA RELATED JURISPRUDENCE IN INDIA: AN ANALYSIS

Objectives: The objective of this article is to introduce the concept of euthanasia in the Indian context and analyze the existing legal framework. It aims to examine how India's Judiciary has taken initial steps towards legalizing euthanasia, highlighting the determination displayed by the courts. The focus is on summarizing recent case laws that have kept the debate on euthanasia alive in India over the last fifteen years. Methods: The article discusses three recent case laws that have significantly contributed to the ongoing debate around euthanasia in India. It explores the role of the Indian Judiciary in gradually establishing guidelines and shaping the process of legalizing euthanasia within the framework of law. Results: The article highlights how the Judiciary has played a crucial role in advancing the conversation around euthanasia. Through a detailed examination of case laws, it demonstrates how legal guidelines have been fine-tuned over the years to align with the growing support for euthanasia in India. Conclusion: The article concludes that the Indian Judiciary has made significant progress in addressing the complex issue of euthanasia, laying the groundwork for its potential legalization within the ambit of law. The debate is ongoing, but there have been substantial developments in shaping the legal landscape around euthanasia in India.

Beyond Borders: A Global Comparison of Euthanasia Laws

Euthanasia, the planned termination of someone's life to alleviate struggle, continues to be a debatable and ethically complicated problem globally. Within this elaborate internet of perspectives, the worldwide landscape sees the legalization and regulation of euthanasia followed by various countries. This paper explores the difficult panorama of euthanasia laws, evaluating the location of India and international perspectives, as the requests for euthanasia increase internationally due to various medical, socio-emotional, and existential elements. Laws on euthanasia are taken up by nations that allow such practice, despite conditional legalization, including the UK, and existence assist withdrawal is allowed within the United States. Following the Aruna Shanbaug case, India shifted its legal role, supplying conditional acceptance of passive euthanasia. However, lively euthanasia remains to watch for parliamentary dialogue. Addressing requests for euthanasia could want a nuanced method, mixed with individualized palliative care. This paper provides a bridge between India's regulatory framework and global strategies and is enriched with the aid of the complexities of euthanasia legal guidelines. The prison history of euthanasia in India has witnessed profound adjustments through the years, marked by seminal judicial judgments and legislative discussions. At Gift, India has no precise regulation around euthanasia. It is, however, a count number of files that in 2018, the Supreme Court of India gave a landmark judgment mentioning that the idea of 'proper to die' belongs to the domain of fundamental rights below Article 21 of the Constitution. The judgment made active euthanasia criminal, and it laid down tips approximately its implementation, including that which incorporates a dwelling will and which has also made provision for having a medical board involved.

Ethical Dilemma and Compassionate Choices: Intersection of Buddhist Ethics and Euthanasia in India

Euthanasia, also known as mercy killing, involves the act of ending a person's life to alleviate unbearable pain or suffering, or to facilitate a painless death in situations where life has lost its meaning and has become unpleasant. While, Buddhism is about being kind, paying attention, and stopping suffering, so it has a different view that might affect people and communities dealing with end-of-life decisions. Focusing on compassionate choices, the study examines how Buddhist principles influence perceptions and decisions regarding end-of-life care. Investigating the conflicts between Buddhist teachings, which emphasize compassion and the easing of distress, and the evolving legal landscape of euthanasia in India. In this paper we shed light on the nuanced ethical considerations and we suggest that people should work together and think carefully to find a good balance between what Buddhism teaches and the laws about euthanasia in India. This means including kindness and being aware of others in legal discussions and making sure everyone understands each other's viewpoints. The goal of this paper is to create a fair way that respects each person's rights while dealing with the deep ethical questions connected to Buddhism.

Knowledge, Attitude and Practices (KAP) of Medical Professionals on Euthanasia: A Study From a Tertiary Care Centre in India.

Euthanasia or mercy killing has remained as a matter of extensive debate and ethical conflicts in the scientific literature. Discussions on this theme have got legal, religious, political and philosophical ramifications. The present study aimed to assess the knowledge, attitude and practices of medical professionals in a tertiary care hospital. After taking prior approval from the institutional ethics committee a structured questionnaire was prepared and distributed among 200 consenting medical professionals in a tertiary care centre in the North-Western region of India. 50% of the respondents said that they were sure of the existing regulation on euthanasia in India. When gender differences were considered a significant difference (p=0.0147) was found between the two sexes regarding the alternate decision maker for deciding euthanasia. It was observed that there was a significant difference(p=0.0055) between those with the age more than 30 years and aged less than 30 years regarding the type of euthanasia that is justifiable. In the present study, the percentage of doctors favouring euthanasia is higher than compared in previous studies. The view of euthanasia is highly variable in different studies. Even though passive euthanasia has been legalised recently, there is an apprehension that it might be misused.

Euthanasia - Review and update through the lens of a psychiatrist.

Euthanasia is not infrequent in the modern practice of medicine. Active euthanasia is legal in seven countries worldwide and passive euthanasia has recently been legalized in India by the Supreme Court. In India, physicians and nurses generally have a favorable attitude towards euthanasia but lack in adequate training to deal with such requests. The role of a psychiatrist is very important in evaluation of request for euthanasia on medical as well as psychiatric grounds. Among patients with end-stage medical illnesses who make a request for euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide, many may have underlying untreated depression. In the complex backdrop of long-term chronic medical illnesses, depression can be very difficult to diagnose and treat. Patients with dementia and other neuropsychiatric illnesses have the issue of consent and capacity. Legalizing euthanasia in these patients can heave dire moral implications. There is clear need of adequate training, formulation of guidelines, and supportive pathway for clarity of clinicians regarding euthanasia in India.

Laws on Attempt to Suicide and Euthanasia in India

Laws on Attempt to Suicide and Euthanasia in India

Legalizing euthanasia or dooming to a slow death

In India, the sanctity of life has been placed on highest pedestal. From the moment of his birth, a person is clothed with basic human rights. Article 21 of the Indian Constitution provides for Right to Life which is one of the basic and most sacrosanct right. This right has received the widest possible interpretation at the hands of judiciary so as to make the human existence a dignified one. With the pronouncement of judgment by the Apex Court of India in Aruna Shaunbaugh’s case on March 7, 2011, a new debate has started in the country regarding the legalization of euthanasia in India. Euthanasia is one of the most debated and controversial topics in the world. Euthanasia , basically, is bringing about the death of a terminally ill patient or a person who is in persistent vegetative state so that his life which is merely a namesake can be peacefully end up. Thus, the basic intention behind euthanasia is to ensure a less painful death to a person who is in any case going to die after a long period of suffering.

Advance directives for euthanasia in India

This review article starts by defining Good death, Euthanasia, and Advance Directives (ADs). Most of the religions in India do not support self-annihilation although exceptions are made in cases of “Samadhi” by saints. Indian law permits the donation of organs in brain dead patients, while Euthanasia is viewed as a criminal act. The case of Aruna Shanbaug and a plea for Euthanasia resulted in the Honorable Apex court of India permitting passive euthanasia and also issued ADs. It is now for the parliament to debate and enact. The role of a psychiatrist at present appears limited in the context of Euthanasia and Advanced Directives, but in future, importance might increase with psychiatric comorbidities being higher in incurable conditions and suffering. Literature from foreign countries shows that patients with mental illness have also undergone Euthanasia which is of grave concern.

EUTHANASIA IN INDIA – LEGISLATIVE PERSPECTIVE

Every human being should enjoy right to life. Article 21 of the Indian Constitution as well as under article 3 of International Convention Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948, guaranteed the right to life. Every aspect of right to life has been always subject to consideration of judiciary and depend upon the facts and situations. Right to die is also claimed under this head. Euthanasia is interpreted as 'mercy killing' or 'good death'. It is advocated that there are different situations in which it should be allowed to the person to let him choose his death in place of compelling him living alive. There are different approaches in this regard which either opposes the grant of mercy killing or denies to grant the death as right to die due to some causes. Everyone has the right to live dignified life according to his wish being living into certain limits and it is expected that a human being should struggle also in adverse circumstances around him. He should not lean in front of the situations. The Indian culture gives us such teachings. Hindu religion believes in the eternity of soul. Death is only the way to change a body. The soul never dies, it is eternal. Muslim religion also believes that life should be finished only upon the wish of Allah, it condemns the unnatural ending of life. But in present society in some situations, it is defended that the person should have the right to choose death. Thus, in this context the paper concentrated on the law of euthanasia in India in a legislative perspective and judicial interpretations on euthanasia.

Current Scenario of Euthanasia in India

Euthanasia is a recently talked topic now a days in India. Few societies like Jainism etc. practicing santhara/ salekhana/ ichhamaran as of now embodied in passive euthanasia permitted by Supreme Court of India on 3 rd March, 2018 to a person who is above the age of 18 years. Various types of euthanasia are there but only Passive euthanasia will be permitted as per law to terminally ill patients who give advance medical directives to treating doctor to end his life in a dignified manner. Advance medical directions given by the patient should clearly mention under which circumstances passive euthanasia (removing life support from patient but palliative care may be continued) should be administered by following legal formalities.

Current Scenario of Euthanasia in India

Euthanasia is a recently talked topic now a days in India. Few societies like Jainism etc. practicing santhara/ salekhana/ ichhamaran as of now embodied in passive euthanasia permitted by Supreme Court of India on 3 rd March, 2018 to a person who is above the age of 18 years. Various types of euthanasia are there but only Passive euthanasia will be permitted as per law to terminally ill patients who give advance medical directives to treating doctor to end his life in a dignified manner. Advance medical directions given by the patient should clearly mention under which circumstances passive euthanasia (removing life support from patient but palliative care may be continued) should be administered by following legal formalities.

The Debate on Euthanasia in India - In a Nutshell

The Debate on Euthanasia in India - In a Nutshell

India Decides on Euthanasia: Is the Debate Over?

Euthanasia is a dilemma due to the presence of more than one course of conduct justified on various grounds. Medical science has devised solutions for battling excruciating pain and agony. The Supreme Court in March 2018 delivered landmark judgment allowing ‘living will’ where, an adult in his conscious mind, is permitted to refuse medical treatment or voluntarily decide not to take medical treatment to embrace death in a natural way. The judgment gave legal recognition to Passive euthanasia in India and robust interpretation of ‘Right to life’ including ‘Right to die’ thereby bringing it within manifold of article-21 of constitution of India. The present paper describes evolution of Euthanasia in India contemporary to Dutch law as well as pros and cones of the landmark judgment in Aruna Shanbaug case.

Acceptance of Legalization of Euthanasia in India and Chance of Medical Miracle-A Survey among Medical Students

The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, on 9th March 2018 legalized Passive Euthanasia by means of the withdrawal of life-support to patients in a permanent vegetative state. The decision was made as part of the verdict in a case involving Aruna Shanbaug, who had been in a Persistent Vegetative State (PVS) until her death in 2015. On the other side, events seemingly inexplicable, outside the range of medical precedents, the Medical Miracles make a question mark on this legalization. A study was conducted taking the views of 96 MBBS students on it based on a questionnaire. There was mixed response from the students and the expectations of some miraculous outcome (in treatments) have been expressed that imposes a still persisting doubt in justified acceptability of legalization of Euthanasia in India.

The Current Status of Euthanasia in India

The Current Status of Euthanasia in India

Debating Euthanasia in India: A Review of the Proceedings at the UNSECO Bioethics forum, Manipal

Debating Euthanasia in India: A Review of the Proceedings at the UNSECO Bioethics forum, Manipal

Interpretation: a confounding factor.

With reference to the article "Passive euthanasia in India: a critique", authored by Ms Rohini Shukla and published online on August 5, 2015, I would like to make a few comments and highlight the following points. First, the author notes that Section 309 IPC has been decriminalised. This is not so since there has neither been any amendment to the IPC, nor has any ordinance been passed regarding the matter. Attempting suicide is still an offence in India. Second, the author observes that withholding life support is an act of omission and withdrawing life support is an act of commission and the terms have been used interchangeably by the Hon'ble Court, although there is a subtle difference between the two terms.

Debating Euthanasia in India: A Review of the Proceedings at the UNSECO Bioethics Forum, Manipal

This review is about the discussion that followed my presentation at the UNESCO Bioethics Forum, Manipal. To contextualise, I begin with a brief account of the legal status of euthanasia in India, and then summarize the main argument of my presentation - if the moral objective of euthanasia is to end a patient's suffering by ending his or her life in the best possible way, then the form of euthanasia legal in India is inconsistent with this moral objective owing to the consequences it entails for the patient. Given this background, I elaborate on two issues that came up in the discussion - the missing framework of patients' rights, and the medical fraternity's reluctance to espouse multidisciplinary approaches in understanding the morality and legality of euthanasia. Contrary to popular belief as voiced at this forum, developing the framework of patients' rights, and simultaneously espousing multidisciplinary approaches, as I hope to show, would take the discussions of euthanasia in better informed directions.

Aruna Shanbaug: Is Her Demise the End of the Road for Legislation on Euthanasia in India?

Aruna Ramachandra Shanbaug breathed her last after 42years of being in a persistent vegetative state. Euthanasia in any form is not permitted in India and it was only in the year 2011 that a petition was filed in the court that urged the cessation of her force feeding with a nasogastric tube and the request for her peaceful death. What followed was a string of arguments and counter arguments relating to Euthanasia. The sad demise of Aruna Shanbaug is not the end of an individual, but may be the end of the road for clear cut guidelines and legislation on Euthanasia in India.

Passive euthanasia in India: a critique.

Given its preoccupation with the doctor's agency in administering euthanasia, the legal discourse on euthanasia in India has neglected the moral relevance of the patient's suffering in determining the legitimate types of euthanasia. In this paper, I begin by explicating the condition for the possibility of euthanasia in terms of the following moral principle: the doctor ought to give priority to the patient's suffering over the patient's life. I argue that the form of passive euthanasia legally permissible in India is inconsistent with this moral principle, owing to the consequences it entails for the patient. Inevitably, it is acts of commission on the part of the doctor that can provide the best possible death, which is the moral objective of euthanasia. To meet this objective, doctors must be seen as agents who possess the moral integrity and technical expertise to judge when and how the patient’s life ought to be terminated, depending on the patient’s medical condition. They are not bound to save lives and provide care unconditionally.