Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 150
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]
Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 151
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]
Warning (512): Unable to emit headers. Headers sent in file=/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php line=853 [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 48]
Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 148]
Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 181]
LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Govt opposes mercy death; over to court

Govt opposes mercy death; over to court

Share this article Share this article
published Published on Mar 3, 2011   modified Modified on Mar 3, 2011
The attorney-general of India today urged the Supreme Court to permit Aruna Shanbaug, a Mumbai nurse who has been in a coma for over 38 years, to live in her present state and not stop food to end her life.

Shanbaug, 60, has been in a persistent vegetative state since a murderous attack by a ward attendant of Mumbai’s KEM hospital who tied a dog chain around her neck and tried to rape her. The hospital nursing staff have since been taking care of her.

In 2009, activist Pinki Virani, who wrote a book on her, moved the top court as her “next friend” seeking its permission to stop hospital authorities from force-feeding her food, water and medicines so as to hasten her end.

The court then referred the matter to a medical team. The team commented about her debilitating physical state but could not offer any conclusive evidence of the state of her mental well-being.

A bench, comprising Justices Markandey Katju and Gyan Sudha Mishra, had also sought the opinion of attorney-general G.E. Vahanvati and senior counsel T.R. Andhyarujina before taking a call on this issue.

Vahanvati said the issues in this case were not just legal. “They involve larger moral, ethical and social issues. The approach in a sensitive and delicate subject… should be considered on application of the principles evolved by society through democratic process and existing legislation.”

He referred to a private member’s bill titled “Euthanasia (Regulation) Bill, 2002”, which Parliament had refused to vet into a law. It was prepared by MP Uttamrao Dhikale to provide compassionate termination of the life of persons completely and permanently invalid or bed-ridden by incurable disease.

A committee set up to look into this bill unanimously rejected it, Vahanvati said, citing among others the Hippocratic oath that doctors take against intentional or voluntary killings of patients. The panel also recorded that medical science may progress enough to relieve the patient of the pain associated with such disease.

He added that the government was yet to accept the Law Commission’s 196th report that recommended withdrawal of medical treatment, including nutrition and water.

A decision could be taken either by the patient (or his next of kin), and doctors withholding or withdrawing treatment should not be criminally liable, it had recommended.

“Once the legislature has taken a decision not to proceed with the process of enactment of a law to allow terminally ill patients to have the choice of withdrawal or withholding of medical treatment, this court ought to give due weight to it,” Vahanvati said.

The top court has also declined in earlier cases to recognise or accept the right to allow withdrawal/withholding of medical treatment by doctors, alternatively known as physician-assisted termination of life.

In one case, the court has in fact equated any such act with attempt to commit suicide, which is an offence and the doctor assisting in such an act would be liable for abetting suicide.

“Withdrawal or withholding of food to Aruna Shanbaug would be cruel, reprehensible and lead to pain and suffering. It cannot be allowed,” Vahanvati said.

“…this is unknown to Indian law and is contrary to law,” he said, adding that she had the “right to live in her present state”.

Andhyarujina said withdrawal of nutrition through a nasogastric tube was not the same as unplugging a ventilator, which causes instant death. “In case of discontinuance or artificial feeding, the patient will starve to death with all the sufferings, pain and distress associated with such starving,” he said.

“This is a relevant consideration in a persistent vegetative state patient like Aruna who is not totally unconscious and has sensory conditions of pain…,” he said.

KEM hospital, represented by counsel Pallav Sisodia, contested Virani’s plea. “We have taken care of her for over 38 years. If we do not make an application seeking to end her life, Ms Virani cannot,” he said.

Virani was present in court. The court after hearing all sides reserved its orders for Monday.

The Telegraph, 3 March, 2011, http://telegraphindia.com/1110303/jsp/nation/story_13661345.jsp


Related Articles

 

Write Comments

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

Video Archives

Archives

share on Facebook
Twitter
RSS
Feedback
Read Later

Contact Form

Please enter security code
      Close