The Indian Supreme Court on Friday <a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/supreme-court-approves-passive-euthanasia-35189" target="_blank">recognised the right to passive euthanasia</a> for the terminally ill.&nbsp;

The decision was taken by a five-judge bench led by Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra.&nbsp;

The court&#39;s 538-page judgement included lines from the Amitabh Bachchan film and song Mukkadar ka Sikandar.&nbsp;

Paragraph 47 on page 231 ends with the lines: &quot;Rote hue aate hain sab, hasta hua jo jayega 
Woh mukaddar ka Sikandar jaaneman kehlayega.&quot;

Which translates into: &quot;Everybody comes into this world crying. But he who leaves it laughing is the king of destiny.&quot;&nbsp;

Paragraph 46 ends with a quote from Dr Jonathan Moreno, which says: &quot;Euthanasia, and especially physician-assisted suicide appears as the ultimate post-modern demand for dignity in an era of technologically-mediated death.&quot;&nbsp;

It it is important to understand though that the court has not allowed physician-assisted suicide. What it has allowed is passive euthanasia -- defined as &quot;the withholding or withdrawal of life-sustaining medical treatment in the knowledge that the person concerned will die.&quot;&nbsp;

Active euthanasia on the other hand is &quot;the ending of a terminally ill person&#39;s life by direct intervention, such as administering a lethal dose of painkilling drugs.&quot;

The court had already allowed passive euthanasia in 2011 the case of <a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/aruna-shanbaug-first-supreme-court-verdict-on-euthanasia-35226" target="_blank">Aruna </a>Shaunbaug. But on Friday it allowed people to make that choice for themselves.&nbsp;

(Aruna had been in a &quot;vegetative state&quot; since she was attacked in 1973 and unable to make any choice for herself.)&nbsp;

On Friday, the Supreme Court said that a terminally-ill patient can write a &#39;living will&#39; that permits doctors to withdraw life support, saying a person with no will to live shouldn&#39;t suffer in a comatose state.

A five-judge constitution bench headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dipak Misra said passive euthanasia and advance living will are &quot;permissible&quot;.

The bench, also comprising justices A K Sikri, A M Khanwilkar, D Y Chandrachud and Ashok Bhushan also laid down guidelines as to who would execute the will and how the nod for passive euthanasia would be granted by the medical board.

The apex court said that advance directives for terminally-ill patients could be issued and executed by the next friend and relatives of such a person after which a medical board would consider it.

The top court said that the directions and guidelines laid down by it shall remain in force till a legislation is brought on the issue.

The CJI, while reading out the judgement, said that though there were four separate opinions of the bench but all the judges were unanimous that the &#39;living will&#39; should be permitted since a person cannot be allowed to continue suffering in a comatose state when he or she doesn&#39;t wish to live.

The top court had in 2011 recognised passive euthanasia in the Aruna Shanbaug case by which it had permitted withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment from patients not in a position to make an informed decision.

The bench was hearing a PIL filed by NGO Common Cause, saying safeguards were needed while taking a decision by medical boards to withdraw life support of a terminally-ill patient.

On January 15, 2016, the Centre had said the 241st report of the Law Commission stated that passive euthanasia should be allowed with certain safeguards and there was also a proposed law - Medical Treatment of Terminally Ill Patient (Protection of Patients and Medical Practitioners) Bill, 2006.

Read the full Supreme Court judgement:

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false"><iframe class="scribd_iframe_embed" data-aspect-ratio="0.7068965517241379" data-auto-height="false" frameborder="0" height="600" id="doc_4593" scrolling="no" src="https://www.scribd.com/embeds/373380793/content?start_page=1&amp;view_mode=scroll&amp;access_key=key-vUCvijLZ1qp0Afe782rL&amp;show_recommendations=true" title="Supreme-Court-Euthanasia" width="100%"></iframe></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

&nbsp;

(With inputs from PTI)

 
&nbsp;

'Rote hue aate hain sab, hasta hua jo jayega... Woh mukaddar ka Sikandar jaaneman kehlayega,' the court said in its 112-page judgement

The Indian Supreme Court on Friday recognised the right to passive euthanasia for the terminally ill. The decision was taken by a five-judge bench led by Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra. The court's 538-page judgement included lines from the Amitabh Bachchan film and song Mukkadar ka Sikandar. Paragraph 47 on page 231 ends with the lines: "Rote hue aate hain sab, hasta hua jo jayega Woh mukaddar ka Sikandar jaaneman kehlayega." Which translates into: "Everybody comes into this world crying. But he who leaves it laughing is the king of destiny." Paragraph 46 ends with a quote from Dr Jonathan Moreno, which says: "Euthanasia, and especially physician-assisted suicide appears as the ultimate post-modern demand for dignity in an era of technologically-mediated death." It it is important to understand though that the court has not allowed physician-assisted suicide. What it has allowed is passive euthanasia -- defined as "the withholding or withdrawal of life-sustaining medical treatment in the knowledge that the person concerned will die." Active euthanasia on the other hand is "the ending of a terminally ill person's life by direct intervention, such as administering a lethal dose of painkilling drugs." The court had already allowed passive euthanasia in 2011 the case of Aruna Shaunbaug. But on Friday it allowed people to make that choice for themselves. (Aruna had been in a "vegetative state" since she was attacked in 1973 and unable to make any choice for herself.) On Friday, the Supreme Court said that a terminally-ill patient can write a 'living will' that permits doctors to withdraw life support, saying a person with no will to live shouldn't suffer in a comatose state. A five-judge constitution bench headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dipak Misra said passive euthanasia and advance living will are "permissible". The bench, also comprising justices A K Sikri, A M Khanwilkar, D Y Chandrachud and Ashok Bhushan also laid down guidelines as to who would execute the will and how the nod for passive euthanasia would be granted by the medical board. The apex court said that advance directives for terminally-ill patients could be issued and executed by the next friend and relatives of such a person after which a medical board would consider it. The top court said that the directions and guidelines laid down by it shall remain in force till a legislation is brought on the issue. The CJI, while reading out the judgement, said that though there were four separate opinions of the bench but all the judges were unanimous that the 'living will' should be permitted since a person cannot be allowed to continue suffering in a comatose state when he or she doesn't wish to live. The top court had in 2011 recognised passive euthanasia in the Aruna Shanbaug case by which it had permitted withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment from patients not in a position to make an informed decision. The bench was hearing a PIL filed by NGO Common Cause, saying safeguards were needed while taking a decision by medical boards to withdraw life support of a terminally-ill patient. On January 15, 2016, the Centre had said the 241st report of the Law Commission stated that passive euthanasia should be allowed with certain safeguards and there was also a proposed law - Medical Treatment of Terminally Ill Patient (Protection of Patients and Medical Practitioners) Bill, 2006. Read the full Supreme Court judgement: × (With inputs from PTI)

With quote from Hindi film song, Supreme Court allows passive euthanasia

The Supreme Court on Friday gave a landmark judgment by approving passive euthanasia --&nbsp;recognising terminally ill patient to &#39;die with dignity&#39;.

Also read: <a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/supreme-court-approves-passive-euthanasia-35189">Supreme Court approves passive euthanasia, </a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/supreme-court-approves-passive-euthanasia-35189">recognises</a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/supreme-court-approves-passive-euthanasia-35189"> &#39;right to die with dignity&#39;</a>

The term passive euthanasia is used by the Supreme Court of India which basically means withdrawal of artificial medical support system to patients. It is only available to patients who are terminally ill and are at the last stage of their life without any hope of recovery or improvement.

There are two types Euthanasia -- active euthanasia and passive euthanasia.

Also read: &nbsp;<a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/euthanasia-debate-35209">Key terms Euthanasia debate you need to know</a>

What&#39;s the difference between active euthanasia and passive euthanasia

Active euthanasia occurs when doctors deliberately do something on humanitarian grounds like injecting a substance in the patient&#39;s body&nbsp;that causes the patient&#39;s death while passive euthanasia is when doctors stop doing something to keep the patient alive like switching off life-support machines or disconnecting feeding tubes.

In passive euthanasia what doctors do is that they&nbsp;alter life support system and let nature take its course.

Another main difference between active and passive euthanasia is the moral debate that surrounds the killing of the patients. Many thinkers consider active euthanasia an immoral practice and consider it to be an equivalent to murdering a person because doctors in a way are assisting&nbsp;the patient to commit suicide.

Active Euthanasia is legal in a handful of countries like Canada, Switzerland etc&nbsp;in comparison to passive euthanasia which is legal in many countries with limitation to specific circumstances and the approval of councillors and doctors or specialists.

There is further sub-categorization of active and passive euthanasia which is voluntarily and involuntarily.

Involuntarily euthanasia is when the consent is directly taken from the patient whereas involuntarily euthanasia is when the patient is unable to give consent for example if the patient is in coma or the patient is a very young baby or the patient is not in an age of making the decision for himself.

There are countries like Belgium, Netherlands, Luxemburg where active euthanasia is banned but voluntary-active euthanasia is legal.

&nbsp;

 
&nbsp;

&nbsp;

The Supreme Court on Friday gave a landmark judgment by approving passive euthanasia, recognising terminally ill patient to 'die with dignity'

The Supreme Court on Friday gave a landmark judgment by approving passive euthanasia -- recognising terminally ill patient to 'die with dignity'. Also read: Supreme Court approves passive euthanasia, recognises 'right to die with dignity' The term passive euthanasia is used by the Supreme Court of India which basically means withdrawal of artificial medical support system to patients. It is only available to patients who are terminally ill and are at the last stage of their life without any hope of recovery or improvement. There are two types Euthanasia -- active euthanasia and passive euthanasia. Also read: Key terms Euthanasia debate you need to know What's the difference between active euthanasia and passive euthanasia Active euthanasia occurs when doctors deliberately do something on humanitarian grounds like injecting a substance in the patient's body that causes the patient's death while passive euthanasia is when doctors stop doing something to keep the patient alive like switching off life-support machines or disconnecting feeding tubes. In passive euthanasia what doctors do is that they alter life support system and let nature take its course. Another main difference between active and passive euthanasia is the moral debate that surrounds the killing of the patients. Many thinkers consider active euthanasia an immoral practice and consider it to be an equivalent to murdering a person because doctors in a way are assisting the patient to commit suicide. Active Euthanasia is legal in a handful of countries like Canada, Switzerland etc in comparison to passive euthanasia which is legal in many countries with limitation to specific circumstances and the approval of councillors and doctors or specialists. There is further sub-categorization of active and passive euthanasia which is voluntarily and involuntarily. Involuntarily euthanasia is when the consent is directly taken from the patient whereas involuntarily euthanasia is when the patient is unable to give consent for example if the patient is in coma or the patient is a very young baby or the patient is not in an age of making the decision for himself. There are countries like Belgium, Netherlands, Luxemburg where active euthanasia is banned but voluntary-active euthanasia is legal.

Know the difference between active and passive euthanasia!

active-euthanasia

Active Euthanasia, News on Active Euthanasia, stories on Active Euthanasia, articles on Active Euthanasia, Active Euthanasia stories at Wion, Active Euthanasia news, Active Euthanasia latest news