Recent developments in the U.K. have reignited global discussions on euthanasia. The U.K.’s House of Commons passed the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill allowing physician-assisted dying for mentally competent adults with less than six months to live. This contrasts with India’s cautious approach, which permits only passive euthanasia under strict conditions. India faces unique ethical, cultural, and institutional challenges that shape its end-of-life care policies.
Legal Status of Euthanasia in India
India recognises passive euthanasia through Supreme Court rulings. Passive euthanasia allows withdrawing life support when treatment only prolongs suffering. Active euthanasia, involving direct intervention to cause death, remains illegal. The Constitution’s Article 21 guarantees the right to life and dignity but does not extend to a right to be killed. Courts maintain a clear distinction between allowing death and causing death.
Challenges in Implementing Passive Euthanasia
Despite legal approval, passive euthanasia is difficult to implement. Complex procedures include advance directives, multiple medical board approvals, and judicial review. These cause delays that distress patients and families. Many decisions occur informally outside legal frameworks, putting doctors at risk. The lack of streamlined systems undermines the dignity intended by the law.
Comparing Indian and U.K. Models
The U.K.’s model benefits from a robust healthcare system with universal access and strong regulation. India’s healthcare is fragmented and under-resourced. Cultural factors such as family roles, religious beliefs, and literacy levels complicate end-of-life choices. Introducing active euthanasia risks coercion of vulnerable groups due to economic and social pressures. India’s cautious stance reflects its social realities and ethical concerns.
Proposed Reforms for India’s Passive Euthanasia
India should focus on improving passive euthanasia protocols rather than adopting active euthanasia. Digital tools can simplify advance directives, linking them with Aadhaar for verification. Physicians should assess mental capacity online. Hospital ethics committees with medical and palliative care experts could authorise withdrawal of life support swiftly. Decentralised oversight through hospital networks and digital dashboards may replace ineffective ombudsman models.
Safeguards and Ethical Considerations
Mandatory measures like a seven-day cooling-off period, psychological counselling, and palliative care review are essential. They prevent misuse and ensure informed decisions. These align with international standards and protect vulnerable patients. Medical education must include training on end-of-life ethics and law. Public awareness campaigns are needed to normalise advance care planning discussions.
Building a Humane End-of-Life Care System
India’s reforms should balance dignity, accessibility, and protection against abuse. Streamlined digital procedures, local ethics oversight, and strong safeguards can make passive euthanasia workable. This approach respects Indian values and constitutional rights. Empowering patients without risking exploitation is key to humane end-of-life care.
Questions for UPSC:
- Critically discuss the ethical and legal challenges of implementing euthanasia laws in diverse socio-cultural contexts like India.
- Analyse the role of digital technology in improving healthcare delivery and legal processes in India, with reference to end-of-life care reforms.
- Examine the constitutional interpretation of the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and its implications for passive euthanasia.
- Point out the differences between active and passive euthanasia and estimate their potential social impact in countries with fragmented healthcare systems.
