Euthanasia is a tough call. I can just imagine the dilemma that the Supreme Court was forced with with the recent Aruna case. In a country where suicide is a criminal offence, is it possible to legalize Euthanasia? And if it is, how does one draw the line between them?
Personally, I agree that these need to be evaluated on a case to case basis. In the case of Aruna, I don’t agree with the verdict. Having been sexually assaulted and throttled with a chain 37 years back by a janitor in the hospital where she worked, she has spent the past 4 decades in a vegetative state. Being cared of by the staff of the same hospital, I believe she has become more of a trophy that they believe they have a right or moral duty to keep alive. But how does one define keeping alive? Just because her lungs can still breathe and her heart still beat, is she justified in her indignity? Isn’t another few decades of not being able to move, communicate or express far worse a punishment than what Euthanasia may be?
It’s a tough call. Can be argued either ways. Especially in a country where poverty is high and medical expenses can urge many to opt for the same instead of spending life savings down a road of no recovery. But in that case, hand in hand with a relook at the Euthanasia laws, our courts also need to relook at the healthcare programs provided by the govt. They need to formulate schemes where such patients may be taken care of by giving subsidised aid so that the decision of the family to move the courts for Euthanasia is not built on lack of funds but rather on a ground of compassion for the dignity of the individual.