The time for legislation to deal with euthanasia has come. The Union government has now informed a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court
that its experts are examining a draft Bill proposed by the Law
Commission in its 241st report. However, it has been advised by the Law
Ministry to hold back its enactment now, as the matter is pending before
the court. Over a decade ago, the government felt that legislation on
euthanasia would amount to doctors violating the Hippocratic Oath and
that they should not yield to a patient’s “fleeting desire out of
transient depression” to die. The government’s latest stand represents
forward movement in the quest for a legislative framework to deal with
the question whether patients who are terminally ill and possibly beyond
the scope of medical revival can be allowed to die with dignity. The
question was raised with a great deal of passion in the case of Aruna
Shanbaug, a nurse who lay in a vegetative state in a Mumbai hospital
between 1973 and 2015. In a landmark 2011 verdict
that was notable for its progressive, humane and sensitive treatment of
the complex interplay of individual dignity and social ethics, the
Supreme Court laid down a broad legal framework. It ruled out any
backing for active euthanasia, or the taking of a specific step such as
injecting the patient with a lethal substance, to put an end to a
patient’s suffering, as that would be clearly illegal. It allowed
‘passive euthanasia’, or the withdrawal of life support, subject to
safeguards and fair procedure. It made it mandatory that every instance
should get the approval of a High Court Bench, based on consultation
with a panel of medical experts.
The question now before a Constitution Bench on a petition by the NGO
Common Cause is whether the right to live with dignity under Article 21
includes the right to die with dignity, and whether it is time to allow
‘living wills’, or written authorisations containing instructions given
by persons in a healthy state of mind to doctors that they need not be
put on life-support systems or ventilators in the event of their going
into a persistent vegetative state or state of terminal illness. The
government’s reply shows that the Directorate-General of Health Services
has proposed legislation based on the recommendations of an Experts’
Committee. The experts have not agreed to active euthanasia because of
its potential for misuse and have proposed changes to a draft Bill
suggested by the Law Commission. However, there seems to be no support
for the idea of a ‘living will’, as the draft says any such document
will be ‘void’ and not binding on any medical practitioner. It is
logical that it should be so, as the law will be designed specifically
to deal with patients not competent to decide for themselves because of
their medical condition. This has to be tested against the argument that
giving those likely to drift into terminal illness an advance
opportunity to make an informed choice will help them avoid “cruel and
unwanted treatment” to prolong their lifespan. To resolve this conflict
between pain and death, the sooner that a comprehensive law on the
subject is enacted, the better it will be for society.
Source: The Hindu
No comments:
Post a Comment