Is Euthanasia Legal In India?

Euthanasia, sometimes known as "mercy killing," is a sensitive and controversial subject. It poses significant queries on mortality, life, and individual choice. Imagine if someone has a terminal illness that is causing them great suffering. They could think that choosing to die will stop their suffering and that life is too difficult to bear.

However, many people need clarification on whether such choices should be permitted when presented to them. Morally, is that right? Who gets to make the ultimate decision—the family of the patient, the physicians, or the individual who suffers themselves?  Debates on this difficult problem are common in many communities, including Indian culture.

It's vital to appreciate the term in its broadest meaning before going into the legality of euthanasia in India. What does euthanasia actually imply, and why is it desired? Which sorts of euthanasia are there? Together, let's explore these issues to learn more about this crucial subject.

What Is Euthanasia? 

The terms "good" (Eu) and "death" (Thanatos) are Ancient Greek words that give rise to the name euthanasia. The word "euthanasia" thus implies "good death." As a result, the phrase Euthanasia means "good death." It's the act of injecting a terminally ill person or stopping exceptional medical treatment to end their life, either because they are in terrible pain or because they have a fatal illness. 

A person whose life is judged worthless of being lived is intentionally killed in euthanasia. Euthanasia has long been a controversial topic in the medical community, with many calling it "murder" if carried out by others or "suicide" if carried out by the patient.

Suicide and euthanasia are related in that they both involve the voluntary taking of one's own life. Legislators see euthanasia with a bit more sympathy than they do suicide attempts, which are nevertheless illegal unless it can be demonstrated that the individual undertaking the act is mentally ill.

Types Of Euthanasia

There are several variations of euthanasia. Generally, it is classified based on the following:

According To Consent

There are three categories of euthanasia based on the sort of consent given. They are:

• Voluntary Euthanasia: A patient who chooses this type of euthanasia consciously decides to terminate their own life.  The requester needs to be in excruciating pain and have a fatal illness that doctors have confirmed.

• Non-Voluntary Euthanasia: It is a subset of the process known as "voluntary euthanasia". The individual's life is taken in this instance when they are unable to communicate their desires and must rely on a proxy request to terminate it, most frequently for their own advantage and health-related reasons. Family members frequently make the choice in situations involving this act of euthanasia.

• Involuntary Euthanasia: This euthanasia refers to the practice of a patient who is thought to be suffering from a disease that will kill them, or from unbearably excruciating pain, but who has not received a formal request to end their life. "Lack of consent" in this sense refers to a patient's incapacity to truly offer assent. Long-lasting sleep or a coma during which the patient's choices are unknown might fall under this category.

According To Means Of Death

Moreover, there are two categories of euthanasia based on the way of death. They are:

• Active Euthanasia: It's a technique that intentionally ends someone's life. This is taking proactive measures to take someone's life, such as giving them an IV injection of a lethal dose of drugs. On occasion, it's also called "aggressive euthanasia".

• Passive Euthanasia: This kind of euthanasia is the deliberate act of causing someone to die by removing artificial life support, such as a ventilator, from a terminally ill patient. In these cases, the required actions to preserve the existence of the victim are not taken.

Emergence Of Euthanasia In India 

The development of euthanasia in India has been a prolonged and controversial process influenced by changing views in the fields of medicine, law, and society. Due to cultural and religious views that place a high value on life, the concept of mercy killing has mainly been taboo for a long time. But as medical technology developed and end-of-life care became more complicated, the question of euthanasia started to come up. 

The key example of Aruna Shanbaug, a nurse who suffered a severe assault and spent more than 40 years in a vegetative state, in 2011 marked a turning point in the discourse. When the Indian Supreme Court was presented with a case advocating for euthanasia, it decided against it outright but approved passive euthanasia under very tight regulations. 

This ruling sparked a wider discussion on the rights, dignity, and need of euthanasia legislation for patients. Ultimately, the Supreme Court upheld living wills and permitted passive euthanasia in 2018, further recognizing the right to die with dignity. India's statutory acknowledgement of the issue is a significant step in resolving ethical issues with individual autonomy.

Religious Perspective Of Euthanasia In India 

In India, the many cultural contexts and spiritual beliefs of the nation are closely connected with the religious and societal views surrounding euthanasia. Religion has a big influence on how people see life and death. Let's see about each religion and its perspective:

Hinduism

A large number of Hindus believe that karma controls both life and death and that there is a cycle of birth, death, and rebirth (samsara). This concept holds that taking someone's life too soon through euthanasia might affect their spiritual path and karma. However, if passive euthanasia is viewed as a necessary component of letting nature run its course without human interference, then some Hindus are willing to tolerate it.

Christianity

The majority of Christian churches, particularly the Catholic Church, oppose euthanasia. Christians consider life to be sacred and a gift from God. Even in cases where there is a solid reason, taking a life is ethically reprehensible. Christian doctrine places an immense value on tending to the sick and suffering, viewing euthanasia as an infringement of God's will.

Islam 

The Islamic community opposes euthanasia because they hold that every human life originates with God and that individuals have no right to end their own lives. Euthanasia has been ruled against by the religious faith.

Buddhism

There are many distinct takes on euthanasia in Buddhism. Buddhism places a high value on compassion, and on the basis of this, certain people have been allowed death to end their suffering. However, in other groups, even showing sympathy for death has been viewed as a sign of a monk's failure.

Sikhism

According to the Guru Granth Sahib, accepting the sanctity of life and yielding to God's will are highly valued. Although Sikh texts do not specifically address euthanasia, the majority of Sikhs reject it because they believe in natural death and God's purpose.

Jainism

Jainism is in favour of the idea of voluntary dying, or sallekhana (fast till death). Both householders and ascetics are advised to do this, but it is only possible when one has completely absolved oneself of all emotions and has the determination to neither live nor die. It cannot be referred to as suicide since it must be carried out in a conscious mental state. 

Social Perspective Of Euthanasia In India 

The social attitude of euthanasia is greatly influenced by the cultural, religious, and ethical values of India. Given its rich religious heritage in Buddhism, Hinduism, and other faiths, Indian society often views life as sacred and accepts only natural death. Also, the concept of "ahimsa" (non-violence) dissuades taking a life, even if it is in pain. 

However as individuals become more conscious of their rights as patients and the need to die with dignity, opinions are beginning to shift. Many urban and younger generations are beginning to accept the idea of passive euthanasia as a compassionate choice for those who are close to death, even if many still retain conventional attitudes.

Legal Considerations Regarding Euthanasia In India 

India has intricate regulations addressing euthanasia. The main legal factors are as follows:

Article 21 Of The Constitution

According to this interpretation, having a dignified death is a part of having the right to life under Article 21. Legal arguments in favour of euthanasia have been based on this understanding.

IPC Provisions

Section 300 Exception 5 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) classifies euthanasia as criminal homicide. Section 309 and Section 306 on the other hand criminalize attempted suicide, which raises the question of what legal standing terminally ill persons have when they seek to end their suffering.

Landmark Cases 

The following are some noteworthy precedent-setting euthanasia instances in India:

Case 1: State of Punjab v.s Gian Kaur (1996)

This historic Supreme Court decision examined the connection between India's suicide ban and euthanasia. A terminally sick patient named Gian Kaur contested the legality of Section 309 of the Indian Penal Code, which makes attempted suicide illegal, and asked for permission to terminate her life. Under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, the court deliberated whether the freedom to die is an essential component of the right to life. The court decided that Section 309 is maintained since it excludes the right to die. The ruling stressed that life is precious and ought to be protected and that making suicide attempts illegal discourages people from acting rashly when they're feeling hopeless.

The court recognized the psychological and emotional challenges that suicidal persons experience, but it insisted that society's right to life protection comes first. The ruling highlighted that even while some persons may experience unbearable anguish, the state nonetheless has a duty to protect human life, upholding the present legal framework around euthanasia and suicide.

Case 2:  Aruna-Shanbaug  v.s Union of India (2011)

The interested party filed the writ petition on behalf of the victim, who was sexually assaulted by a staff boy in 1973 when she was employed as a nurse in a hospital, 36 years ago. She was not conscious, and her brain was unconscious. The hospital personnel took care of her as she lay in bed all day. The petitioner contended that the respondent ought to be directed to stop feeding the victim and that the victim should also stop receiving food. 

The court determined not to allow the victim to cease receiving nourishment or life-saving therapies after considering the doctors' report. The act of stopping therapy to kill the person is known as passive euthanasia. Not permitting a patient in a coma to get food is another kind of passive euthanasia. The physicians' evaluation was considered by the court, which hoped for favourable results. The court decided that the only method to legalize and promote passive euthanasia in India is through law.

Conclusion 

In summary, euthanasia is a complex topic in India. The Supreme Court defends the right to die with dignity by permitting passive execution in some circumstances, even when active euthanasia is prohibited. This realization shows how critical it is to have empathy for persons who are approaching the end of their lives. The necessity of establishing precise guidelines and rules to safeguard patients' rights and welfare is increasing as euthanasia debates continue.