Supreme Court allows Passive Euthanasia – Screamed the headlines in Times of India…
First thing in the morning, I wake up to read this!
Well, this is not the kind of topic I would normally write about, but seeing all the hoopla around the topic in the last few days, I thought I might as well.
For a traditionally conservative society, the Indian Judicial system has surely come a long way. Decriminalizing Section 377, allowing live-in relationships, and now this.
To make it clear – the SC has only permitted passive Euthanasia and not active; which means a terminally ill patient can be allowed to die by cutting off the life support system, but not by giving a fatal injection which is in the case of active. This is the precise reason why Aruna Shanbaug is not allowed to die, as she isn’t under a life support system!
In a way legalizing Euthanasia is a good thing – I fully support it, in fact I would support both the passive and active forms. After all isn’t the right to live life one’s own? Then why is the right NOT to live life someone else’s? The decision should solely be that of the person concerned and nobody else. If they think that there is no point living a life of burden for both themselves and others, then that should be it. No questions asked.
But then of course the issue in case of passive euthanasia surfaces when the patient is unable to make the decision for themself, which is when family, doctors ‘next friend’ and all others come into the picture. In this case, who ultimately is the final deciding authority? What if the patient’s family have ulterior motives and decide to let go of them? How do you ensure that the case is a genuine one? Even though the issue has just been officially acknowledged by the SC, passive euthanasia is already actively (pun intended) being practiced in the country. For e.g. when the family could no longer afford further treatment given the high costs of private healthcare, they might want to pull the plug.
Several European countries including the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxemborg and Switzerland have legalized Euthanasia. While most nations across the world permit the passive form, few of these European nations allow the active form as well. In fact, “Suicide Tourism” is quite a popular movement in Europe, so much so that there is an active market for it with firms such as “Dignitas” having made a thriving business out of it. Interestingly, it says “21% of people receiving assisted dying in Dignitas do not have a terminal or progressive illness, but rather “weariness of life“.
Now Euthanasia is defined as “the practice of ending a life in a manner which relieves pain and suffering”, according to Wikipedia (thanks to my friend the author of ‘soul’s euthanasia’ for pointing out the subtle difference between Suicide and Euthansia. Ha!). In such a case, how is the above practice of Dignitas justified even legally speaking? Beats me!
There is this very interesting concept called “Santhara” in Jainism, which is a “religious ritual of voluntary death by fasting”. Some may call it suicide, while some may call it karma. I on the other hand find it strangely similar to the Euthanasia practiced by Dignitas.
But then sometimes commercialization of such a sensitive issue may be totally inappropriate. For e.g. I had heard of this story about Dignitas (not sure how true though) – “A very old lady aged 80+ goes to Dignitas, accompanied by her son to commit Euthanasia as she does not want to be a burden on the son anymore. She just expresses her concerns to the officials there that her son may find it difficult to sustain without her. And the response of the officials was like – Alright! He could also go through Euthanasia at a 50% discount offer”. Simply appalling, to say the least!
Coming back to India, what’s with the authorities and Aruna Shanbaug? This lady has been in a vegetative state for the last 37 years. Thirty Seven Years!!! Is this some kind of a joke? Of what use has her life been to anyone, including herself? And the worst part is, Aruna not under a life support system, she is perfectly sane and well able to communicate her feelings and her will to go through Euthanasia. What right do third parties like the hospital or the Supreme Court have to deny her wishes? It is indeed such a pity!
Anyway, I can keep going on with this and writing a lot more boring stuff on related topics as well, but let me stop here.
But to conclude, I think the best thing of all would be to be like Bheeshma of Mahabharata. To be able to die at will!
Juggling my thoughts... 