Euthanasia –A Discourse of Dignity or Abhorrence

We   frequently run into people enduring pain due to some prolonged ailment. Euthanasia is conceived as a mechanism that would escort a critically ill patient at the death’s door. The intent lying at the core of this is to certify a much conflict-free and peaceful death of an individual who has been subjected to an appalling distress or disease for a prolonged period of time. The process of “Euthanasia” has been baptized with the name of –Mercy Death because it alleviates the person from acute anguish and allows him to depart life with utmost dignity.  Euthanasia has been assorted into active and passive or simultaneously into voluntary, in-voluntary and non- voluntary branches.  The undertaking of “Active Euthanasia” takes place when a medical practitioner bestows the sufferer with a lethal dose and eventually the proceeding of laying down one’s life begins.  The urgency to exercise “Passive Euthanasia” occurs by withdrawing artificial life support systems –Mechanical ventilators, Intubation, Central Venous Catheter, Chest Tubes, Feeding Tubes, humidity control unit, etc.  A situation where an individual, appeals to the medical practitioner for his death due to throbbing agony has been regarded as voluntary euthanasia. Involuntary euthanasia is a situation where the patient is incompetent to give his consent because of mental impairment.

The human civilization has endorsed such practices prior to the advent of globalization. It has been notable in the Greek and Roman culture where assisting someone to die or put them to death was an accepted and standard practice under certain given set-up. In the Greek city of Sparta, there was a customary practice of putting the newly born to death bearing severe deficiency.  Euthanasia, when viewed from the kaleidoscope of the Hindu religion proposes few contradictory impressions. One such pre-monition is that aiding someone to conclude his agonizing life, an individual is carrying out a righteous deed which is a part of his moral-obligations. Another view upholds the notion that with the intention to terminate one’s life even if the person has been subjected to abject distress, an individual is interfering with the cycle of death and re-birth and those indulged in Euthanasia would take up the lingering Karma of the patient. The pragmatic death is one that postulates the mind to be conscious and thereby any lenitive treatments would be unfair as it would degrade the mental vigilance.  The jurisprudence pertaining to the arena of Euthanasia has gained momentum over the past few years and conquers a persistent position when debated.  Talking of Netherlands, we see that it became the first country to grace Euthanasia and legitimize the process in April 2002.It has been regulated by the “Termination Life on Request and Assisted Suicide (Review Procedures) Act, 2002”. According to this, a medical practitioner will not be exposed to any penalization if he acts in compliance with the situation.  Turning our attention towards the Northern Territory of Australia, we discover that it became the first country to validate Euthanasia by advancing the Rights of The Terminally Ill Act, 1996 but was made felonious in due course by the Euthanasia Laws Act ,1997.  The trends pertaining to Euthanasia or assisted suicide is slightly different when viewed under the pre-text of laws in the United States maintaining a distinction between active and passive Euthanasia.  In countries like Russia and Spain, the idea of Euthanasia or assisted suicide has been declared as something unsanctioned. The bearings of Switzerland with regards to Euthanasia is at odds, as from the vistas of the country, suicide is not a crime but assisted suicide accompanied by self- absorbed motive is a misdemeanor from the panorama  of  legality. This finds a strong footing under Section 115 of The Swiss Penal Code.  Belgium has proclaimed the undertaking of Euthanasia as legal by the standards of the Belgian Act on Euthanasia.

Speaking of India, one must not deny but acknowledge that the constitution has been designed through sheer motivation acquired from various foreign constitutions. The legal disposition of India cannot be studied in quarantine. Euthanasia is undoubtedly illegal in India because the motive here is to annihilate an individual’s life which cannot be compensated by any factual or ethical representations. Such cases would directly come under the jurisdiction of Clause First, Section 300 of The Indian Penal Code, 1860. However in such cases there is a  well-founded approval of the lamented Exception 5 to the mentioned section would be attracted and the medical practitioner shall be punished in the eyes of law under Section 304 for blameworthy extermination not adding up to manslaughter. The Right to Suicide is by no means an obtainable right in India. The India Penal Code firmly demonstrates any act of suicide as offensive from the optics of law and accommodates provision to bring someone to book for the same through Sections 305 (Abetment of suicide of child or insane person),Sections 306 (Abetment of Suicide), Sections 309 (Abetment to commit suicide).

Cinema plays a pivotal role in the psychological imagery of the modern times. In the year 1930s and 1940s, the Nazi Germany expropriated the power of cinema in a series of films about eugenics, heredity and euthanasia. The resolution was to percolate these propaganda films in the lives of the mainstream audience to substantiate the necessity and acceptance towards the practice of killing in the Third Reich’s plan. There have been few, divergent movies fashioned to inscribe the notion of Euthanasia. Films not just mirror the culture and customs in which they are made but also contain within them the prospective to spearhead a culture. They contain the potential to create myths in to a cultural setting. Taking instances from the said statement, it can be noted that in 1950s, John Wayne taught men to be like one. Marilyn Monroe was established as a cult for making women behave like one.  Coming to the pictorial narrations, we are presented with an array of choices. You Don’t Know Jack( Barry Levinson , 2010)is a movie which  narrates the story of Dr Jack Kevorkian, here the protagonist promoted the right to assisted suicide in United States and presented it as an option to welcome assistance , information, guidance to those who opt for ending their lives. The patient himself carried out the act of killing himself with medical assistance unlike Euthanasia.  Another movie in this domain is Guzaarish 2010, composed and assisted by Sanjay Leela   Bhansali.  The plot revolves around a paralyzed magician, turned Radio –Jockey who files a petition in court seeking permission to end his unfruitful life. The Sea Inside is a Spanish drama directed by Alejandro Amenabar   and revolves around the real life of Ramon Sampedro who was left quadriplegic after a diving accident and his fight to end his life. The movie looks into the fabricated matters of Euthanasia or assisted suicide.

Alokananda Nag

Intern, AGA

REFERENCES

1.Euthanasia and Human Rights – Euthanasia illegal in India http://www.legalserviceindia.com/article/l118-Euthanasia-and-Human-Rights.html

2. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/259485727_POSITION_OF_EUTHANASIA_IN_INDIA_-_AN_ANALYTICAL_STUDY

3.Cinematic Perspective on Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1057/9780230102293_14.pdf

4.Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide , A Cinematographic Approach to the Death that hurts the most https://hrcak.srce.hr/file/255418