JUST IN
You are here: Home » Current Affairs » News » National

INX Media case: Karti Chidambaram's CBI custody extended; 10 highlights

Mohammed Shami charged with attempt to murder, poisoning wife: 10 updates
Business Standard

SC allows passive euthanasia; terminally-ill now have a choice; 10 updates

The Supreme Court said a person has the 'right to die with dignity' and can make an advance living will authorising the withdrawal of life-support system

BS Web Team  |  New Delhi 

Passive euthanasia gets a lifeline from govt
The Supreme Court said a person has the 'right to die with dignity' and can make an advance living will authorising passive euthanasia. Representative image
Right to die with dignity is a fundamental right, the Supreme Court on Friday held and said that an individual could make an advance "living will" that would authorise passive euthanasia under certain circumstances. The apex court's Bench held that passive euthanasia and living will were legally valid. The apex court said that a person could prepare a "living will", under which the withdrawal of life-support system could be authorised if he reached an irreversible stage of terminal illness in the medical view. However, while a five-judge Constitution Bench, headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra, allowed an individual to prepare the advance directive, or living will, it attached strict conditions for executing the "will", which would be made by a person in his or her normal state of health and mind. The apex court was delivering its verdict on a public interest litigation filed in 2005 by an NGO called Common Cause and argued by lawyer Prashant Bhushan. On May 11, 2005, the Supreme Court had taken note of Common Cause's PIL seeking approval for terminally ill individuals to be allowed to execute a living will for passive euthanasia. The apex court had sought the Centre's response on the plea that sought the declaration of 'right to die with dignity' as a Fundamental Right under Article 21 (right to life) of the Constitution. The court pronounced four separate but concurring judgments. Here is what a living will means and the top 10 developments around SC's passive euthanasia judgment: 1) SC verdict on euthanasia could be misused, says KCBC Senior Kerala priests said the Supreme Court judgment, allowing terminally-ill patients passive euthanasia with conditions, could be misused. Terming it "unfortunate and condemnable", Kerala Catholic Bishop Conference president Archbishop Soosa Paikam said the verdict was "painful" and would have disastrous consequences. "The right of life is in the hands of God. It was not acceptable for anyone who believes in humanity to kill a person suffering from old age or sickness due to sympathy," he said. 2) Now, we have the 'right to die with dignity': The apex court held that an individual had the "right to die with dignity" and could make an advance living will to authorise the withdrawal of life-support system. The advance will would allow this if, in the medical view, the person concerned reached an irreversible stage of terminal illness. In his or her living will, an individual could state in advance that his or her life should not be prolonged through the means of a ventilator or artificial support system. Recognising the "right to die with dignity", the court permitted a person to draft in advance a living will in case she/he slips into an incurable condition. 3) SC lays down strict conditions: While it allowed any person to prepare a living will, the five-judge Constitution Bench, headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra, attached strict conditions for the execution of the will. The will would be made by a person in his normal state of health and mind. The Bench, which also included justices A K Sikri, A M Khanwilkar, D Y Chandrachud, and Ashok Bhushan, laid down guidelines on who would execute the will and how the approval for passive euthanasia would be granted by the medical board. The life support system could be turned off only after the statutory medical board declared the patient in question to be incurable, the apex court said. Further, the Bench said that its guidelines and directives would remain in force until a legislation was brought regarding the issue. ALSO READ: SC allows Passive Euthanasia with guidelines 4) Allowing a 'meaningful existence': While allowing the framing of a living will for passive euthanasia, Justice Chandrachud said that to deprive a person of "dignity at the end of life" was tantamount to depriving him or her "of meaningful existence". Justice Chandrachud also said that life and death were inseparable. "Bodies involve continuous change but mind remains constant... Death represents culmination of life...

Freedom, liberty are core of meaningful life," he said. ALSO READ: Mumbai: Elderly couple writes to President seeking active euthanasia 5) Living will explained: However, what exactly is a living will? According to Livelaw.in, it is a written document allowing a patient to provide explicit instructions in advance regarding the medical treatment that is to be administered when he or she is terminally ill or no longer capable of expressing informed consent. The living will, according to the site, includes authorising a patient's family to switch off the life-support system if a medical board declares that the person is beyond medical help. ALSO READ: SC mulls 'living will to die' for passive euthanasia: All you need to know 6) Passive euthanasia explained: The next question in people's mind would be what exactly is passive euthanasia. The Oxford Dictionary provides a simple explanation: Passive euthanasia is the withdrawal and/or withholding of life-sustaining medical treatment with the knowledge that doing so will lead to the patient's death. This differs from active euthanasia, which, according to the dictionary, is the ending of a terminally ill patient's life through direct intervention, including a lethal dose of painkilling drugs. 7) Passive euthanasia possible without living will, too: In such a case where there is no living will that has been framed, for passive euthanasia, the family members of a terminally ill person could approach the high court under Article 226, Bar & Bench reported. According to the site, detailed guidelines on how to deal with such pleas have also been laid down. ALSO READ: Victoria becomes first Australian state to legalise voluntary euthanasia 8) Govt opposed to living will: The government, for its part, had expressed its opposition to the idea of a living will during the hearing, Livelaw.in reported. According to the site, the government had argued that a living will could be misused, adding that it might not be viable as a part of public policy. However, it also said that it was in-principle in agreement with permitting passive euthanasia. 9) Judgment on a 2005 plea: The apex court's judgment came on a plea filed in 2005 by NGO Common Cause. The NGO was seeking the right to make a living will that would authorise the withdrawal of life-support system in the event of the will-maker reaching an irreversible vegetative state. 10) Prashant Bhushan appeared for NGO: Appearing for the NGO Common Cause, advocate Prashant Bhushan had said that since a patient in a coma could not express his or her wish to end his or her life, the law should allow them to put it down in writing in advance so that they should not be tortured. In the absence of a law authorising doctors to do so, they keep incurable patients on life support, he had said. ALSO READ: All you need to know about Aruna Shanbaug Aruna Shanbaug case: On March 7, 2011, in a separate plea on behalf of Aruna Shanbaug, a nurse lying in a vegetative state at a hospital in Mumbai, the apex court had allowed passive euthanasia.

With agency inputs
First Published: Fri, March 09 2018. 18:13 IST

PREVIOUS STORY

NEXT STORY
RECOMMENDED FOR YOU
Advertisements