ABSTRACT
Passive euthanasia is commonly defined as withholding or discontinuing treatment with the intention and expectation that death will occur sooner rather than later, based on the idea that an early death is in the patient’s best interests.It has been a topic of profound moral and legal debate worldwide. It revolves around the idea that people who are terminally ill or suffering from untreatable conditions should be allowed to have the liberty to make verdicts about their own lives, inclusive of their ability to end their lives in a civilized and decent manner. Whereas Active Euthanasia, in contrast to passive euthanasia, presupposes an active intermediation to end a person’s life with substances or external force.The principle of Passive is being recognized worldwide. In India, a significant milestone was achieved whenthe Supreme Court, in a groundbreaking decision, recognized the Right to Passive Euthanasia in a landmark judgment, paving the way for individuals to have control over decisions about end-of-life.
This short article discusses the notion of Passive Euthanasia or assisted dying, elucidating intentionally letting a person die to end his misery motivated solely by the best interest of the person who dies. The article proposes how the right to die with dignity is bracketed with passive euthanasia and how it is linked with Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. Furthermore, it discusses Passive Euthanasia in light of the Aruna Shanbaug case and confabulates the Supreme Court’s landmark decision of Common Cause (A Regd. Society) v. Union of India[1] and how this ruling has sparked moral and ethical debates in the country. Lastly, the article concludes with how passive euthanasia is an essential climacteric of end-of-life choices.
[1] Common cause (A Regd. Society) v. Union of India, 2018, 5 SCC 1, AIR 2018 SC 1665