Should Euthanasia(MERCY KILLING) be legalized in India??

Everyone has the right to live with dignity. And when conditions became such that your life becomes a byrden on others and its impossible to come out of it, its better to let the person succumb rather than stretchin his/her life and making him suffer even more. As in the case of a nurse who has been living the life of a dead plant for so many years after being raped , its even more painful for her to bear the torture she's goin through right now. Therefore in exterme conditoins its for the benefit of a person to let him end his life.


Student
IILM Gurgan
 
life or death is definately not in the hands of human....it is god almighty who has decided n sent us to earth......

but the pain a person suffer during in curable diseases is unbarable n heart threating.....
with that pain it is not only the patient suffering but also the family of that patient suffering ...

if the patient and his family members does not hav any prob ten tere is no issue of a debate....But as India on human grounds such an act cannot b accepted so i should depend upon the family that what they want to go for....

Regards
Alisha Savla
 
Yes, it can be legalized. As the patient has the right to live or die in this world. Government shouldn't force them to live with unbearable pain each second. His/her family is also affected, no doubt.
 
India's Supreme Court considers euthanasia application

RENDAN TREMBATH: Human rights activists in India want the Supreme Court to allow a severely disabled woman to die.

Aruna Shanbaug has been in a vegetative state for 36 years after being raped and almost strangled.

Euthanasia supporters say she should be allowed to die with dignity.

South Asia correspondent Sally Sara reports.

SALLY SARA: This story began in November 1973. A young nurse, Aruna Shanbaug, was sexually assaulted and beaten by a hospital orderly. Her injuries were so severe she was declared paralysed, blind and brain dead.

For the past 36 years, she's been bedridden in a room at the same hospital in Mumbai. Five times a day, the nurses come in to feed and care for her. She hasn't had any extensive medical tests for a quarter of a century.

Her story has been the subject of a book and intense public interest in India.

COMMENTATOR: Aruna Shanbaug has been brain dead since 1973, living like a vegetable for the past 36 years.

COMMENTATOR 2: She's conscious, she has perception, but she's disabled, she's immobile, she can't talk, she can't see.

SALLY SARA: Now human rights activists led by Indian journalist Pinki Virani have filed a petition with the Supreme Court. They say Aruna Shanbaug is being forced fed and should have the right to die with dignity.

Human rights lawyer Prashant Bhushan says if political activists can stage hunger strikes for their beliefs, why can't Ms Shanbaug be allowed to refuse food.

PRASHANT BHUSHAN: The right to live is the right to live with dignity. If you can't live with dignity, life really has no meaning. If you are forced to live a life of indignity or great suffering, then that clearly violates your right to life.

SALLR SARA: While the constitution gives the right to live with dignity, suicide and euthanasia are illegal in India.

Dr Sanjay Nagral, the former editor of the Indian Journal of Medical Ethics, says it's an extremely complicated issue.

SANJAY NAGRAL: We have made suicides illegal, as has any other society. But there will be patients who are terminally ill from let's say an advanced cancer with severe pain and who will say that please let me die and please help me to die.

SALLY SARA: The Supreme Court is seeking a full medical report from staff caring for Aruna Shanbaug. But it's unclear whether she will undergo modern neurological tests to determine the true extent of her brain function.

No one really knows if Aruna Shanbaug has been awake or brain dead for the past 36 years. She's spent most of that time locked in her hospital room to protect her privacy. Three generations of nurses have looked after one of their own.

The debate over her future is now in the hands of India's Supreme Court.

This is Sally Sara in New Delhi for The World Today.
 
human beings will never give up on the urge to play god but lack the experience to actually play the part. A person who is suffering with an unbearable amount of pain should be given the choice of ending his life. However the consent should be given by him alone and not his family . if in a vegetative state an inquiry into the benefits to the people in terms of monetary considerations should be done before the sentence is passed. We do not have the power over others lives and by that logic we must not have power over their deaths either.
 
No it should not be legalized in India.
Why?
Our law and order system is simply not capable enough to handle this if it becomes legalized.How do you know whether the person is critically ill or is it only in the reports submitted by bribed doctors.
 
words like that "never give up", fight till last breath"
only suites when ur body gives u support but guys in conditions like comma ,paralysis its very very difficult may gv never give these type of punishments to any one
i wanan ask one thing in the case of hanging a person by the govt procedure is such that culprit will be died within 5 secs then why not mercy killing for those persons who r innocent why?.........
 
In legal parlance, that is called 'the rational person test,' ... That's where somebody else says, 'Even though we have no idea what this person would want in this circumstance in which they cannot themselves tell us what they want, a 'rational' person -- meaning, myself -- in that circumstance would want to die.' So you move very quickly from so-called voluntary euthanasia to involuntary euthanasia. These legal and medical developments are not simply hypothetical: They're in the courts right now.
 
The principle of autonomy would dictate that every human being of sound mind and body should have the right to decide what to do with his or her own body. If someone wishes to die peacefully and no longer suffer, there is nothing anyone can do to stop them from truly committing suicided themselves. The problem comes in when the indivifual must rely on someone else to commit the act which is often the case in a healthcare setting. The patient is usually too incapacitated.

To my knowledge no one has come back from the dead to state that it was "great" or "not so great". How then can we a society base the refusal to legalize patient assisted suicide on the value of life, if it does not know the value of death. If one believes that life is so great and must be preserved against all forms of death, it is an individual choice.
 
only humane choice is to allow individuals who are suffering to choose to end their suffering. Further, the discrepancies in the laws as they exist and how they are being enforced have led to uncertainty. This uncertainty leaves the doctors, their patients and patient's loved ones unprotected. If we do not address these issues openly and head-on, we will have continued uncertainty and unregulated practice of euthanasia or assisted suicide with the fear of prosecution hanging over the heads of all concerned.

The goals of the medical profession should continue to remain one of saving lives but this should not be at the expense of compassion and a terminally ill individual's right to choose to end his or her life and die with dignity.
 
The legal system must be in place.
Law must be stated in advance...
Case to case makes it very complex!!
 
There are many disease which we may not be aware of.
Rather than being specific on any particular medical problem it should be according to the state of the patient.
 
Yes, of course, every individual has the right to life; he'll also have the right to chose to die...........................................
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top