Aishah Afreen Misbah, BA LLB (Hons), CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bengaluru
ABSTRACT
Not just in our nation, but in every nation on earth, euthanasia has long been a contentious issue. While some nations have authorised both active and passive euthanasia, others have taken a different stance, partially legalising one while outright banning the other and condemning the simple act of suicide, or in this case, euthanasia. A Constitution Bench decided that the right to life with dignity under Article 21 includes a right to die with dignity.1 A number of obviously clear effects would surely result from the recognition of human autonomy as a component of Article 21. In the case of Common Cause (A Regd. Society) v. Union of India, the Apex Court upheld the right of citizens to obtain living wills and authorizations from attorneys, which would indicate a person's decision to stop receiving care if they are chronically ill or in a vegetative state. This decision is a tribute to personal autonomy. The sensitive choices a person makes regarding dying are covered under their right to privacy. The privacy principles of explicit consent, physical privacy, and bodily dignity are all violated when a patient is treated against their preferences.
Comments