Since March 2018, passive euthanasia is legal in India under strict guidelines. Patients must consent through a living will, RAI Palliative Care PDF must be either terminally ill or in a vegetative state.
Författare: Vjenka Garms-Homolova.
Das RAI-Basisassessment für die Palliative Care ermöglicht den Versorgungs- und Pflegebedarf in palliativen Lebenssituationen einzuschätzen, zu planen und zu dokumentieren.
On 9 March 2018 the Supreme Court of India legalised passive euthanasia by means of the withdrawal of life support to patients in a permanent vegetative state. On 9 March 2018, the Supreme Court of India, passed a historic judgement-law permitting Passive Euthanasia in the country. 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 it’s intention to do so. However, on 25 February 2014, a three-judge bench of Supreme Court of India had termed the judgment in the Aruna Shanbaug case to be ‚inconsistent in itself‘ and has referred the issue of euthanasia to its five-judge Constitution bench. 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 Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in its judgment dated 7.
2011 , while dismissing the plea for mercy killing in a particular case, laid down comprehensive guidelines to process cases relating to passive euthanasia. 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. In 2018 the Supreme Court of India declared through a five-judge Constitution bench that, if strict guidelines are followed, the government would honor „living wills“ allowing consenting patients to be passively euthanized if the patient suffers from a terminal illness or is in a vegetative state. Aruna Shanbaug was a nurse working at the King Edward Memorial Hospital, Parel, Mumbai. On 27 November 1973 she was strangled and sodomized by Sohanlal Walmiki, a sweeper.
While rejecting Pinki Virani’s plea for Aruna Shanbaug’s euthanasia, the court laid out guidelines for passive euthanasia. According to these guidelines, passive euthanasia involves the withdrawing of treatment or food that would allow the patient to live. Elsewhere in the world active euthanasia is almost always illegal. The legal status of passive euthanasia, on the other hand, including the withdrawal of nutrition or water, varies across the nations of the world. 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.
Even if a decision is taken by the near relatives or doctors or next friend to withdraw life support, such a decision requires presence of two witness and countersigned by first class judicial magistrate, and should also be approved by a medical board set up by the hospital. On 25 February 2014, while hearing a PIL filed by NGO Common Cause, a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court of India observed that the judgment in Aruna Shanbaug case was based on a wrong interpretation of the constitution bench judgment in Gian Kaur v. Thus, in our cogent opinion, the question of law involved requires careful consideration by a Constitution Bench of this Court for the benefit of humanity as a whole. After the court ruling The Telegraph consulted with Muslim, Hindu, Jain and Christian religious leaders.