“EUTHANASIA: Mercy Killing or Death with Dignity”
EUTHANASIA: Mercy Killing or Death with Dignity “Under Article 21” of the Indian Constitution- “No Person shall be deprived of his life and personal liberty except according to procedure establish by Law”, which means the State shall ensure good quality of life, livelihood, liberty and a dignified life. question as to whether the Right to Life includes the Right Not to Life or to Right to Die. Death can be defined as the Termination of life which means death which is causeda) Naturally b) Unnaturally. Further, it can be caused by the action as well as the inaction of a person. Causing the extinction of a life unnaturally by the action of oneself or someone else can be morally bad at the same time it is legally punishable. WHAT IS EUTHANASIA- Many a times life becomes very painful and unbearable so a man may wish death. This voluntary act of embracing death is known as Euthanasia or Mercy Killing or Dayamarana. DID IT EXISTED IN ANCIENT TIMES In Ancient India we find many types of voluntary death practices like Sati, Jauhars, Samadhi and Prayopaveshan (Starving to Death). According to John Locke a philosopher who stated that person have the Right to their Life, Liberty and Property which if termed as Absolute Right to Life then they must be given the Right to decide to die or to end their life in case of a terminal illness. “Naresh Marotrao Sakhre and Anrs. V/s. Union of India” the court observed the difference between Euthanasia and the suicide. Suicide was an act of self destruction to terminates one own life without the aid or assistance of any other human agency whereas euthanasia involves the intervention human agency to ends one’s life. “Gian Kaur V/s. State of Punjab” where it was held that Right to Life does not include Right to Die or Right to be killed. It was upheld that Right to Life was natural right embodied in Article 21 but suicide was unnatural termination for extinction of life and therefore incompatible and inconsistence with the concept of the Right to Life. “In Common Cause V/s. Union of India” where 5 judge bench of the Supreme Court recognized and gave sanction to Passive Euthanasia and living will/ advance directives. The implication of this was Right to Die with dignity is now a fundamental right. “In Aruna Shanbaug V/s. Union of India.” In this case how was a nurse spending over 41 years in a vegetative state as a result of Sexual-Assault, the Supreme Court of India responded to the plea to Euthanasia wherein although the court rejected the petition but allowed Passive Euthanasia in India. The Guidelines in the Passive Euthanasia is the decision to withdraw treatment, nutrition or water established that the decision to discontinue life support must be taken by Parents, Spouse or other Close Relative, or in the absence of them, by a “Next Friend”. The decision also requires court approval. ACTIVE EUTHANASIA Active Euthanasia is when a professional or another person intentionally causes a patient to die. For example, by injecting the patient by a lethal dose of a drug. PASSIVE EUTHANASIA Passive Euthanasia intentionally letting a patient die by withholding the artificial life support such as a ventilator or a feeding tube. The prima-facie distinction between active and passive euthanasia is that the former involves killing a patient while the later involves letting a patient to die. ADVANTAGES & DISADVANTAGES OF EUTHANASIA ADVANTAGE OF EUTHANASIA 1. It is a way to end an extremely miserable and painful life. 2. The Family member of the dying patient is relived of the physical, emotional, economical and mental stress. 3. The patients also have a right to refuse medical treatment. 4. It will free up medical fund of the state to help other poor and needy people. 5. It is the exercise of the fundamental right. DISADVANTAGE OF EUTHANASIA 1. Commercialization of euthanasia can take place. 2. The poor people can resort to this in order to avoid pecuniary difficulties of medication. 3. Old and destitute who are considered as burden on other people can make use of this to shelve their responsibilities. 4. It will de-value Human dignity and offend the Principal of sanctity of life. CONCLUSION For those who are facing terminal illness who are in irremediable pain and suffering, wish to exercise their right to die with dignity, a system of course should be available to them. – MAMTA SINGH SHUKLA (ADVOCATE DELHI HIGH COURT) MOBILE – 9560044035 Email Id: adv.mamtasinghshukla@gmail.com
Corona Virus Vs Law
Corona Virus Vs Law Since the beginning of this year, the entire globe has been gripped byCovid- 19 and people at large are grappling with this pandemic while the Government had initiated a nationwide lockdown to curb and contain the widespread of this outbreak which has affected a substantial number of population. While this lockdown has helped contain community spread of the deceased a legal and legislation audit of this exercise has evaded scrutiny so far. The Disaster Management Act of 2005 was intended “to provide for the effective management of disasters and for matter connected therewith or incidental thereto”. Under this act, the National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) was set up under the leadership of the Prime Minister and the National Executive Committee (NEA) was to be chaired by Home Secretary which laid out guidelines which establishments would be closed and which services suspended during the lockdown period. The State Governments on the other hand exercised powers under the Epidemic Diseases Act of 1897 to issue further direction like social distancing and isolation measures, strict home quarantine. However, the core issue remains to be answered whether the above-mentioned statutes were originally intended to or is sufficiently capable of addressing the grave threat of a pandemic. The use of the archaic Epidemic Diseases Act of 1897 reveals the lack of requisite diligence and responsiveness of Government authority in providing noble and innovating policy solutions to address 21-century problems. The colonial-era law arms the states with emergency power to carry out search operations as well as penalize people violating the provisions of law. The state has also invoked section 54 of the Disaster Management Act of 2005 to deal with people spread in fake news. :-“ whoever makes or circulates a false alarmed or warning as to disaster or its severity or magnitude, leading to panic, shall on conviction, be punished with imprisonment which may extend to 1 year or with fine. The Epidemic Diseases Act of 1897 does not provide any power to the Central Government to intervene in a biological emergency. Moreover, health is a state subject, and while the states are caught off guard, and their response also has been piecemeal. In order to meet the emergency situation like COVID 19, some countries have passed new statutes in order to meet the pandemic in the most efficient and effective manner. There is a realization in these countries that the prevailing provisions of the existing statutes are not sufficient enough to fight the biological emergency situation created by COVID 19. We can discuss one such example by the new Statute passed by the Parliament of the United Kingdom. The Parliament of the United Kingdom passed the Corona Virus Act 2020 was by grants the government emergency power to handle COVID 19 pandemics. It has a time limit for two year It enables the government to restrict or prohibit the public gathering, control or suspend public transport, order business of such shops and Restaurants to be closed temporarily. Detained people suspected of COVID 19 infection. Suspend the operation of court temporally Close educational institutions and child premises Enroll medical students and retired health care workers in health services relax regulation to ease the burden on health care services. Assume control of death management in a particular local area. The Government has stated that these powers may be power switch on or off according to the medical advice it receives. The Act also provides for the measure to comeback the economic effect of the pandemic which includes the power the hold the eviction of tenants. Protect emergency volunteers from becoming unemployed and provide special insurance cover for health care staff taking on additional responsibility. The Government will also reimbursement of statutory sick pay for employees effected by COVID 19. Employers and supermarkets will be required to report supply chain disruption to the government. The Act formally postponed the local election and grants the UK the power to postponed and any other local election, local referendum. This act is subject to parliamentary renewal every six months. Therefore, we may conclude that though COVID 19 pandemic has led to actions being taken by the Government of India under the following Statutes like Epidemic Diseases Act of 1897 and the Disaster Management Act of 2005 unfortunately these Statutes have proved beyond doubt that they are not sufficient enough to meet the pandemic like situation in an effective and most efficient way. Therefore, we need a new tool in the form of a statute to meet this biological emergency whereby we can draw a new plan according to the prevailing situation. This will enable us to draw a new scheme of things which will not only help us in identifying the underlying problems relating to the field of social, economical, political, medical fields but will also prove to be an effective and efficient measure to control and eliminate the dreaded virus. Once the problem is identified the solutions will not be far. Therefore, a new plan in a form of a new Statute will enable both the Government and the citizens to come out of this grim situation and stand victorious in conquering the dreaded disease.
