Quick Overview
The article discusses Passive Euthanasia and the Right to Die with Dignity after the Supreme Court directed a hospital to form a medical board to review a 32-year-old patient in a Persistent Vegetative State (PVS). It covers euthanasia types, legal status in India, major judgments, SC guidelines, global practices, and ethical arguments.
Passive Euthanasia and the Right to Die with Dignity
Why in News?
The Supreme Court has directed a hospital to constitute a medical board to assess a plea for passive euthanasia for a 32-year-old who has been in a Persistent Vegetative State (PVS) for 12 years.
A PVS patient loses cognitive functions (awareness, thinking, voluntary actions) but retains basic autonomic functions like breathing, sleep-wake cycles, and reflexes.
What is Euthanasia?
Meaning
Euthanasia refers to intentionally ending or accelerating death to prevent further suffering due to incurable, terminal, or irreversible medical conditions.
Types of Euthanasia
1. Active Euthanasia
Direct act to end life.
Voluntary – patient consents
Non-voluntary – patient cannot consent
Involuntary – against will (illegal globally)
2. Passive Euthanasia
Withdrawing/withholding life-sustaining treatment to allow natural death.
Recognised in India under specific safeguards.
Legal Position in India
Active Euthanasia
❌ Not permitted.
Under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, deliberate causing of death is punishable under culpable homicide/murder.
Passive Euthanasia
✔ Permitted under strict conditions, recognised as part of the right to die with dignity (Article 21) through Supreme Court judgments.
Law Commission (241st Report, 2012)
Competent patients can refuse life-sustaining treatment.
Doctors following informed refusal are not liable for abetment or homicide.
Judicial Pronouncements
Maruti Dubal Case (1987)
Bombay HC: Right to die is part of Article 21.
Gian Kaur Case (1996)
SC: Right to life ≠ right to die.
Aruna Shanbaug Case (2011)
SC allowed passive euthanasia under strict safeguards.
Common Cause Case (2018)
Landmark ruling:
Recognised Right to Die with Dignity.
Allowed passive euthanasia + Living Will / Advance Medical Directive.
Supreme Court Guidelines
2018 Guidelines
Two-tier medical board:
Hospital Medical Board
District Collector Medical Board
Each required specialists with 20+ years experience.
2023 Modifications
Experience requirement reduced from 20 → 5 years
48-hour time limit for opinion
Changed composition of secondary board
Both boards have 3 members each
Global Scenario
Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg – allow euthanasia + assisted suicide
Switzerland – assisted suicide allowed, active euthanasia illegal
Australia – both allowed for adults with terminal illness
Ethical Perspectives
Arguments For Euthanasia (Pro-Choice)
Autonomy (Liberalism) – right to control one’s body
Utilitarianism – reduces suffering
Beneficence – doctors should reduce pain
Pragmatism – rational medical resource allocation
Arguments Against Euthanasia (Pro-Life)
Sanctity of Life (Deontology) – life is intrinsic
Non-maleficence – doctors must not harm
Virtue Ethics – value in endurance
Slippery Slope – risk of misuse
Did You Know?
Euthanasia ≠ Assisted Suicide
Switzerland sees “suicide tourism” due to liberal laws
Conclusion
The Supreme Court has balanced compassion with safeguards. Passive euthanasia, regulated through medical boards and advance directives, recognises human dignity while preventing misuse.
🟧 CLAT/Exam Relevance
Article 21 expansion
Active vs Passive euthanasia
Living Will / Advance Directive
Major judgments (Aruna Shanbaug, Common Cause 2018)
Medical board procedure
Ethics (utilitarianism, deontology, autonomy)
Global euthanasia laws
Important for: GS2 (Governance, Health), Ethics, CLAT Legal Reasoning.