Context:
The Supreme Court allowed withdrawal of life support in a landmark case, reinforcing the right to die with dignity under Article 21.
Key Highlights:
- Judicial Decision
- First judicial approval for passive euthanasia in a long-term vegetative case.
- Emphasized that right to life includes dignity in death.
- Legal Clarifications
- Passive euthanasia:
- Withdrawal/withholding of life-sustaining treatment
- Active euthanasia:
- Illegal in India
- Shift in terminology:
- From “passive euthanasia” → “withdrawing medical treatment”
- Constitutional & Ethical Basis
- Based on Article 21 (Right to Life).
- Uses ‘best interests test’ for decision-making.
- Legal Background
- Key cases:
- Gian Kaur v. State of Punjab (1996)
- Aruna Shanbaug case (2011)
- Law Commission Reports (196th, 241st) support such provisions.
- No comprehensive legislation yet.
Relevant Prelims Points:
- Passive Euthanasia: Withdrawal of life support.
- Active Euthanasia: Direct act causing death (illegal).
- Article 21: Right to life and personal liberty.
- Living Will: Advance directive for end-of-life care.
Relevant Mains Points:
- Ethical debate:
- Autonomy vs sanctity of life
- Need for clear legal framework and safeguards.
- Role of judiciary in absence of legislation.
- Importance of patient dignity and informed consent.
- Way Forward
- Enact comprehensive euthanasia legislation.
- Standardize procedural safeguards across hospitals.
- Promote awareness about living wills.
UPSC Relevance:
- GS II: Polity, Governance
- GS IV: Ethics (Dignity, Autonomy)