EUTHANASIA AND ASSISTED SUICIDE

 

EUTHANASIA AND ASSISTED SUICIDE:

The term ‘Euthanasia’ is derived from the Greek words which literally means “good death” (Eu= Good; Thanatos = Death). The term was coined by the great historian Suetonius, who described the way King Augustus opted for quick, painful death without suffering.

 According to Oxford English dictionary Euthanasia means, the painless killing of a patient suffering from an incurable and painful disease or a person who is in irreversible coma. Euthanasia is the act of deliberately ending someone‘s life to relieve their suffering. Euthanasia is generally defined as the act, undertaken only by a physician, that intentionally ends the life of a person at his or her request. The physician therefore administers the lethal substance. In physician-assisted suicide (pas) on the other hand, a person self-administers a lethal substance prescribed by a physician. Assisted suicide is to deliberately help or encourage someone to end their life.

It is important to acknowledge that some patients are expressing a desire to die rather than requesting direct action. These requests to die can be made when someone is depressed or emotionally distressed. For example they may feel that they are a burden, or perhaps are suffering intolerable physical or emotional symptoms. At other times decisions have been made carefully, such as deciding that life is intolerable.

REQUIREMENTS:

i)                    The request for euthanasia or pas has to be voluntary, well-considered, informed, and persistent over time.

ii)                   The requesting person must provide explicit written consent and must be competent at the time the request is made.

iii)                 Reporting is mandatory in all the jurisdictions, but this requirement is often ignored.

iv)                 It requires a consultation by a second physician to ensure that all criteria have been met before proceeding with euthanasia or pas.

v)                  A third physician has to review the case if the person‘s condition is deemed to be non-terminal. The consultant must be independent (not connected with the care of the patient or with the care provider) and must provide an objective assessment.

 

·         Being afraid of what the future may hold

·         Experiencing burnout from unrelenting disease

·         Having the wish and need for control

·         Experiencing depression

·         Experiencing extremes of suffering, including refractory pain and other symptoms

 

GLOBAL EUTHANASIA AND ASSISTED SUICIDE LAWS:

 

Netherlands was the first country to legalize euthanasia and assisted suicide in April 2002. The country had issued strict guidelines and conditions, including that “the patient must be suffering unbearable pain, their illness must be incurable and the demand must be made in “full consciousness” by the patient.” Belgium soon followed with a law legalizing euthanasia in the same year. While assisted suicide is not mentioned in the law, “doctors can help patients to end their lives when they freely express a wish to die because they are suffering intractable and unbearable pain”. A living will is a written document allowing a patient to give instructions in advance about the medical treatment to be administered when he/she is terminally ill or no longer able to express informed consent, including withdrawing life support if a medical board declares that all life saving medical options have been exhausted .Notwithstanding these legal predicaments, passive euthanasia is not illegal in most parts of the world including India.

EUTHANASIA AND ASSISTED SUICIDE IN INDIA:

In India, euthanasia is a crime. Section 309 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with the attempt to commit suicide and Section 306 of the IPC deals with abetment of suicide – both actions are punishable. Only those who are brain dead can be taken off life support with the help of family members. Likewise, the Honorable Supreme Court is also of the view that that the right to life guaranteed by Article 21 of the constitution does not include the right to die. The court held that Article 21 is a provision guaranteeing protection of life and personal liberty and by no stretch of imagination can extinction of life.

Landmark case law:

On 17^th December 2010, Pinki Virani claiming to be Aruna‘s friend (a social activistcum-journalist) made a plea in Supreme Court for permitting euthanasia on Aruna Shanbaug. The Honorable Supreme Court sought a report about Shanbaug’s medical condition from the Govt. of Maharastra. Three member Expert Committee subsequently examined and opined that she was in a Permanent Vegetative state. Miss Aruna Shanbaug was working as Junior Nurse in King Edward Memorial (KEM) Hospital, Mumbai, where in the year 1973, she was sexually assaulted by a ward boy. He strangulated her with a dog chain and sodomized her. The resultant asphyxiation caused irreversible injury to the brain causing Permanent Hypoxic Ischemic damage to her brain and since then, she has been in a persistent vegetative state. After some time her family abandoned her, but the nurses at the KEM hospital continued to take care of her. On 7^th March 2011, the Apex Court, while rejecting Pinki Virani‘s plea for active euthanasia, the court observed that “the general legal position all over the world seems to be that while active euthanasia is illegal unless there is legislation permitting it, passive euthanasia is legal even without legislation provided certain conditions and safeguards are maintained”. On 9 March 2018 the Supreme Court of India legalized passive euthanasia by means of the withdrawal of life support to patients in a permanent vegetative state. In the absence of a law regulating euthanasia in India, the court stated that its decision becomes the law of the land until the Indian parliament enacts a suitable law. Active euthanasia, including the administration of lethal compounds for the purpose of ending life, is still illegal in India, and in most countries.

Basic Guidelines issued by the Honorable Court for Passive Euthanasia:

Thus in order to prevent any sort of criminality by the patient‘s relatives/friends or even treating doctors, courts will oversee and take the decision on behalf of the patient. It is ultimately for the Courts to decide, as to what is in the best interest of the patient, though the wishes of close relatives and next friend, and opinion of medical practitioners should be given due weightage in formulating the decision. Whenever there is a need for passive euthanasia for some patient, permission has to be obtained by the concerned High Court before life prolonging measures can be withheld. Here the court will act as ‘parens patriae’, a doctrine that grants the inherent power and authority of the state to protect persons who are legally unable to act on their own behalf.