ARUNA SHANBAUG CASE JUDGEMENT PDF
June 26, 2020 | by admin
Citation: KHC (1) KHC SN (1) KLD ILR . Court of India, Ms. Aruna Ramachandra Shanbaug, a 60 – year – old female. NEW DELHI/MUMBAI: The Supreme Court’s verdict on Friday legalising passive euthanasia owes much to the Aruna Shanbaug case, around. Pinki Virani had filed a plea in seeking that Aruna Shanbaug, who lived in a vegetative state for decades after a brutal rape, be allowed.
|Published (Last):||25 July 2004|
|PDF File Size:||11.92 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||18.67 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Euthanasia is the practice of ending the life of a person in a painless way. It is also known also as mercy killing or assisted suicide, it is usually practiced on a terminally ill person. For example, euthanasia is legal in countries like Belgium, Norway, Sweden and Albania, under the condition that the patient is suffering from chronic pain along with an incurable disease.
In the United States, euthanasia is illegal; whatever may be the condition of the patient.
Euthanasia Debate: The Aruna Shanbaug Judgment
Concept of Right to Life under Indian Constitution. According to judgment article Right to Life means the right to lead meaningful, complete and dignified life. It does not have restricted meaning. The object of the fundamental right under Article 21 is to prevent any restriction by the State to a person upon his personal liberty and deprivation of life except according to procedure established by law.
However, whether is it appropriate shanvaug bring the life of an individual to end is right or not is still debated. It has its own debates both in favour of and against the process. The Judgment in Aruna Shahbaug case.
The court also laid down guidelines for passive euthanasia such as that the matter must be referred to the High Court for a decision and that the doctor, or the parents or spouse of the patient must be the ones to petition for the withdrawal of life-support. Whilst the Court has held that there is no right to die suicide under Article 21 of the Constitution and attempt auna suicide is a crime vide Section IPC, the Court has held that the right to life includes the right to live with human dignity, and in the case of a dying person who is terminally ill or in a permanent vegetative state he may be permitted to terminate.
Aruna Shanbaug case played large role in SC’s landmark verdict on passive euthanasia
Two of the cardinal principles of medical ethics are Patient Autonomy and Jhdgement. Autonomy means the right to self-determination, where the informed patient has a right to choose the manner of his treatment.
To be autonomous the patient should be competent to make decisions and choices. If the doctors treating Aruna Shanbaug and the Dean of the KEM Hospital, together acting in the best interest of the patient, feel that life sustaining treatments should continue, their decision should be respected. Argument in Support of Euthanasia. The right of a competent, terminally ill person to avoid excruciating pain and jdgement a timely and dignified death.
Aruna Shanbaug ruling flawed, says SC – The Hindu
The exercise of this right is as central to personal autonomy and bodily integrity. Right guaranteed in the European Declaration of Human Rights provides the right not to be forced to suffer.
It should be considered as much of a crime to make someone live who with justification does not wish to continue as it is to take life without consent. Given the cost of health care expenditure, the expensive palliative care becomes a huge burden for the family members. That too when the chance of survival is meager. In both the cases it will lead to injustice.
Aruna Shanbaug case
Indian society is emotional and care-oriented. These kind of decisions are against Indian culture. Again there was a great danger in permitting euthanasia that the relatives of a person may conspire with doctors and get him killed to inherit his property. The chances of a medical cure cannot be ruled out. Over timemedical science has evolved to find cure to so called incurable diseases even AIDS.
Voluntary euthanasia is where the consent is taken from the patient, whereas non voluntary euthanasia is where the consent is unavailable e.
While there is no legal difficulty in the case of the former, the latter poses several problems. Moreover, ethical questions like right to dignified death and euthanasia are difficult to be wholly addressed by the strict statutes of law.
It needs a larger social conscience to arrive at a solution, which will reflect the ethical maturity and sensitivity of the society as a whole. Latest Current Affairs December: The Aruna Shanbaug Judgment.