"Euthanasia and the right to choose life or death has always been a subject of vigorous debate, with a varied difference of opinion among policy makers, academics, journalists and the common man. With the two intrinsic values of a right to life against medical killing of the patient versus a right to a good death that nullifies the prospective suffering of the patient. These two morally opposing positions have made it hard to arrive at a conclusion over the right path to take. Interestingly, the word euthanasia is of Greek origin, which essentially means a good death (Moseley, 2012). Euthanasia can be active or passive, and its need usually arises for the terminally ill, especially in cases where the patient is in a vegetative state. Active euthanasia is the provision of administering lethal doses of medical drugs to a patient such that the patient dies a highly controversial issue, illegal in most parts of the world (Khan and Tadros, 2013). Passive euthanasia, as defined by the Supreme Court of India in the Aruna Ramchandra Shanbaug vs Union of India case, is when medical treatment is withheld such that death of the patient occurs due to the withdrawal of medicine. A living will is prepared by terminally ill patients who are likely to pass into a vegetativ
In March 2018, the Supreme Court of India in a landmark judgement passed an order legitimising passive euthanasia in India. However, if passive euthanasia through a â€˜living willâ€™ is legalised, the courts must engage medical practitioners to also look at providing terminal patients a painless way of passing on.
"Issue - Healthcare Perspectives Date - 1st May 2018"