Reforming Passive Euthanasia in India: Making the Framework Workable and Humane
While India recognizes passive euthanasia through Supreme Court judgments, implementation remains difficult due to procedural hurdles like advance directives and medical board clearances. Former judge K. Kannan argues that India's approach reflects ethical conservatism, distinguishing between allowing death and causing it. To improve the system, he suggests a national digital portal for advance directives linked to Aadhaar, empowering hospital ethics committees to authorize withdrawal of life support, and integrating end-of-life care training into medical education. The goal is to ensure dignity in dying without moving toward active euthanasia, which remains illegal in India.
Key Points
- Passive euthanasia involves withdrawing life-sustaining treatment, whereas active euthanasia involves a deliberate act to end life.
- The Supreme Court has upheld the right to die with dignity as part of Article 21 but maintains a distinction between omission and commission.
- Proposed reforms include digitalizing advance directives and decentralizing the oversight mechanism to hospital-based ethics committees.
- Public awareness and medical education on end-of-life care are essential for the legal framework to be effective.
Exam Facts
- Article 21 of the Constitution guarantees the right to life and dignity.
- Common Cause vs. Union of India (2018) is the landmark SC judgment on passive euthanasia.
- Advance directives are legal documents where individuals specify their medical preferences for future incapacity.
Read it. Retain it. Recall it.
Get spaced-repetition flashcards, daily quizzes and offline access — free on Android.