Repository KhNMU >
Кафедра пропедевтики внутрішньої медицини № 1, основ біоетики та біобезпеки >
Наукові роботи молодих вчених. Кафедра пропедевтики внутрішньої медицини № 1, основ біоетики та біобезпеки >
Пожалуйста, используйте этот идентификатор, чтобы цитировать или ссылаться на этот ресурс:
|Название: ||Euthanasia In India|
|Авторы: ||Takhi, Komal|
Гончарь, Алексей Владимирович
Гончарь, Олексій Володимирович
Ащеулова, Татьяна Вадимовна
Ащеулова, Тетяна Вадимівна
|Дата публикации: ||Мар-2015|
|Библиографическое описание: ||Takhi K. Euthanasia In India / K. Takhi, T. Ashcheulova, O. Honchar // Implementation of biethics principles in clinical practice : IV International scientific students`conference, dedicated to the 210th anniversary of KhNMU, 31 of March 2015 : abstract book. – Kharkiv : KhNMU, 2015. – P. 34–35.|
|Аннотация: ||Passive euthanasia is legal in India. On 7 March 2011 the Supreme Court of India legalised passive euthanasia by means of the withdrawal of life support to patients in a permanent vegetative state. The decision was made as part of the verdict in a case involving Aruna Shanbaug, who has been in a vegetative state for 37 years at King Edward Memorial Hospital.
In March 2011, the Supreme Court of India, passed a historic judgement-law permitting Passive Euthanasia in the country. This followed Pinki Virani’s plea to the highest court in December 2009 under the Constitutional provision of “Next Friend”. It’s a landmark law which places the power of choice in the hands of the individual, over government, medical or religious control which sees all suffering as “destiny”. The Supreme Court specified two irreversible conditions to permit Passive Euthanasia Law in its 2011 Law: (I) The brain-dead for whom the ventilator can be switched off (II) Those in a Persistent Vegetative State (PVS) for whom the feed can be tapered out and pain-managing palliatives be added, according to laid-down international specifications.
The same judgement-law also asked for the scrapping of 309, the code which penalises those who survive suicide-attempts. In December 2014, government of India declared its intention to do so.
And on December 23, 2014, Government of India endorsed and re-validated the Passive Euthanasia judgement-law in a Press Release, after stating in the Rajya Sabha as follows: that The Honble Supreme Court of India in its judgment dated 7.3.2011 [WP (Criminal) No. 115 of 2009], while dismissing the plea for mercy killing in a particular case, laid down comprehensive guidelines to process cases relating to passive euthanasia. Thereafter, the matter of mercy killing was examined in consultation with the Ministry of Law and Justice and it has been decided that since the Honble Supreme Court has already laid down the guidelines, these should be followed and treated as law in such cases. At present, there is no proposal to enact legislation on this subject and the judgment of the Honble Supreme Court is binding on all. The Health Minister, Shri J P Nadda stated this in a written reply in the Rajya Sabha.
The high court rejected active euthanasia by means of lethal injection. In the absence of a law regulating euthanasia in India, the court stated that its decision becomes the law of the land until the Indian parliament enacts a suitable law. Active euthanasia, including the administration of lethal compounds for the purpose of ending life, is still illegal in India, and in most countries.
The following guidelines were laid down:
1. A decision has to be taken to discontinue life support either by the parents or the spouse or other close relatives, or in the absence of any of them, such a decision can be taken even by a person or a body of persons acting as a next friend. It can also be taken by the doctors attending the patient. However, the decision should be taken bona fide in the best interest of the patient.
2. Even if a decision is taken by the near relatives or doctors or next friend to withdraw life support, such a decision requires approval from the High Court concerned.
3. When such an application is filled the Chief Justice of the High Court should forthwith constitute a Bench of at least two Judges who should decide to grant approval or not. A committee of three reputed doctors to be nominated by the Bench, who will give report regarding the condition of the patient. Before giving the verdict a notice regarding the report should be given to the close relatives and the State. After hearing the parties, the High Court can give its verdict.|
|Располагается в коллекциях:||Наукові роботи молодих вчених. Кафедра пропедевтики внутрішньої медицини № 1, основ біоетики та біобезпеки|
Все ресурсы в архиве электронных ресурсов защищены авторским правом, все права сохранены.