Euthanasia in India

Passive euthanasia is legal in India.^[1] On 7 March 2011 the Supreme Court of India legalised 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 has been in a vegetative state for 37 years at King Edward Memorial Hospital. The high court rejected active euthanasia by means of lethal injection. 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.^[2][3] Active euthanasia, including the administration of lethal compounds for the purpose of ending life, is still illegal in India, and in most countries.^[4]

Aruna Shanbaug case

Aruna Shanbaug was a nurse working at the KEM Hospital in Mumbai on 27 November 1973 when she was strangled and sodomized by Sohanlal Walmiki, a sweeper. During the attack she was strangled with a chain, and the deprivation of oxygen has left her in a vegetative state ever since. She has been treated at KEM since the incident and is kept alive by feeding tube. On behalf of Aruna, her friend Pinki Virani, a social activist, filed a petition in the Supreme Court arguing that the "continued existence of Aruna is in violation of her right to live in dignity". The Supreme Court made its decision on 7 March 2011.^[5] The court rejected the plea to discontinue Aruna's life support but issued a set of broad guidelines legalising passive euthanasia in India. The Supreme Court's decision to reject the discontinuation of Aruna's life support was based on the fact the hospital staff who treat and take care of her did not support euthanizing her.^[2]

Supreme Court decision

While rejecting Pinki Virani's plea for Aruna Shanbaug's euthanasia, the court laid out guidelines for passive euthanasia.^[2] According to these guidelines, passive euthanasia involves the withdrawing of treatment or food that would allow the patient to live.^[4][6] Forms of active euthanasia, including the administration of lethal compounds, legal in a number of nations and jurisdictions including Switzerland, Belgium and the Netherlands, as well as the US states of Washington and Oregon, are still illegal in India.^[4][7]

Elsewhere in the world active euthanasia is almost always illegal.^[7] The legal status of passive euthanasia, on the other hand, including the withdrawal of nutrition or water, varies across the nations of the world.^[8] As India had no law about euthanasia, the Supreme Court's guidelines are law until and unless Parliament passes legislation.^[4] India's Minister of Law and Justice, Veerappa Moily, called for serious political debate over the issue.^[6] The following guidelines were laid down:

1. A decision has to be taken to discontinue life support either by the parents or the spouse or other close relatives, or in the absence of any of them, such a decision can be taken even by a person or a body of persons acting as a next friend. It can also be taken by the doctors attending the patient. However, the decision should be taken bona fide in the best interest of the patient.
2. Even if a decision is taken by the near relatives or doctors or next friend to withdraw life support, such a decision requires approval from the High Court concerned.
3. When such an application is filled the Chief Justice of the High Court should forthwith constitute a Bench of at least two Judges who should decide to grant approval or not. A committee of three reputed doctors to be nominated by the Bench, who will give report regarding the condition of the patient. Before giving the verdict a notice regarding the report should be given to the close relatives and the State. After hearing the parties, the High Court can give its verdict.

Response

After the court ruling The Telegraph consulted with Muslim, Hindu, Jain and Christian religious leaders. Though generally against legalising euthanasia, Christians and the Jains thought passive euthanasia was acceptable under some circumstances. Jains and Hindus have the traditional rituals Santhara and Prayopavesa respectively, wherein one can end one's life by starvation, when one feels their life is complete.^[9] Some members of India's medical establishment were skeptical about euthanasia due to the country's weak rule of law and the large gap between the rich and the poor, which might lead to the exploitation of the elderly by their families.^[4]

See also

• Thalaikoothal
• Sallekhana

References

External links

• Supreme Court ruling, Aruna Shanbaug vs. Union of India, March 7, 2011 at Supreme Court of India