euthanasia essay upsc

• Skip to primary navigation
• Skip to main content
• Skip to primary sidebar

UPSC Coaching, Study Materials, and Mock Exams

Enroll in ClearIAS UPSC Coaching Join Now Log In

Call us: +91-9605741000

Euthanasia – Arguments in Favour and Against

Last updated on April 7, 2024 by ClearIAS Team

Euthanasia is the deliberate act of ending a person’s life to relieve them of suffering. It is a complex and ethically sensitive topic that has sparked debates and discussions worldwide. There are different forms of euthanasia, and it is regulated differently in various countries.

Euthanasia (“good death”) is the practice of intentionally ending a life to relieve pain and suffering. It is also known as ‘mercy killing’.

In many countries, there is a divisive public controversy over the moral, ethical, and legal issues of euthanasia. Euthanasia is categorized in different ways, which include voluntary, non-voluntary, or involuntary. Euthanasia is also classified into active and passive Euthanasia.

Table of Contents

Voluntary, Non-Voluntary, and Involuntary Euthanasia

• Voluntary euthanasia: It is conducted with the consent of the patient and is termed voluntary euthanasia. Voluntary euthanasia is legal in some countries. Jurisdictions, where euthanasia is legal, include the Netherlands, Colombia, Belgium, and Luxembourg.
• Non-Voluntary euthanasia: It is conducted where the consent of the patient is unavailable and is termed non-voluntary euthanasia. Non-voluntary euthanasia is illegal in all countries. Examples include child euthanasia, which is illegal worldwide but decriminalized under certain specific circumstances in the Netherlands under the Groningen Protocol.
• Involuntary euthanasia: It is conducted against the will of the patient and is termed involuntary euthanasia. Involuntary euthanasia is usually considered murder.

Passive vs Active euthanasia

Voluntary, non-voluntary, and involuntary euthanasia can all be further divided into passive or active variants.

• Passive euthanasia entails the withholding of common treatments, such as antibiotics, necessary for the continuance of life.
• Active euthanasia entails the use of lethal substances or forces, such as administering a lethal injection, to kill and is the most controversial means.

Euthanasia debate

Euthanasia raises profound ethical and moral questions. Supporters argue that it can be a compassionate and dignified way to end suffering, particularly in cases of terminal illness.

Add IAS, IPS, or IFS to Your Name!

Your Effort. Our Expertise.

Join ClearIAS

Opponents argue that it raises significant ethical concerns, including the potential for abuse, coercion, and mistakes in diagnosing terminal conditions.

Arguments in Favor

Historically, the euthanasia debate has tended to focus on several key concerns. According to euthanasia opponent Ezekiel Emanuel, proponents of euthanasia have presented four main arguments:

• that people have a right to self-determination, and thus should be allowed to choose their fate
• assisting a subject to die might be a better choice than requiring that they continue to suffer
• the distinction between passive euthanasia, which is often permitted, and active euthanasia, which is not substantive (or that the underlying principle–the doctrine of double effect–is unreasonable or unsound);
• permitting euthanasia will not necessarily lead to unacceptable consequences. Pro-euthanasia activists often point to countries like the Netherlands and Belgium, and states like Oregon, where euthanasia has been legalized, to argue that it is mostly unproblematic.
• Constitution of India: ‘Right to life’ is a natural right embodied in Article 21 but euthanasia/suicide is an unnatural termination or extinction of life and, therefore, incompatible and inconsistent with the concept of ‘right to life’. The State must protect life and the physician’s duty to provide care and not to harm patients. Supreme Court in Gian Kaur Case 1996 has held that the right to life under Article 21 does not include the right to die.
• Caregiver’s burden: Right-to-die supporters argue that people who have an incurable, degenerative, disabling, or debilitating condition should be allowed to die in dignity. This argument is further defended by those, who have chronic debilitating illness even though it is not terminal such as severe mental illness. The majority of such petitions are filed by the sufferers or family members or their caretakers. The caregiver’s burden is huge and cuts across various financial, emotional, time, physical, mental, and social domains.
• Refusing care: The right to refuse medical treatment is well recognized in law, including medical treatment that sustains or prolongs life. For example, a patient suffering from blood cancer can refuse treatment or deny feeds through a nasogastric tube. Recognition of the right to refuse treatment gives way to passive euthanasia.
• Encouraging organ transplantation: Mercy killing in terminally ill patients provides an opportunity to advocate for organ donation. This, in turn, will help many patients with organ failure waiting for transplantation. Not only does euthanasia give the ‘Right to die‘ for the terminally ill, but also the ‘Right to life‘ for the organ needy patients.

Arguments against

Emanuel argues that there are four major arguments presented by opponents of euthanasia:

• not all deaths are painful;
• alternatives, such as cessation of active treatment, combined with the use of effective pain relief, are available;
• the distinction between active and passive euthanasia is morally significant; and
• legalizing euthanasia will place society on a slippery slope, which will lead to unacceptable consequences
• Euthanasia weakens society’s respect for the sanctity of life.
• Euthanasia might not be in a person’s best interests, for example, getting old-aged parents killed for property will.
• Belief in God’s miracle of curing the terminally ill.
• The prospect of a discovery of a possible cure for the disease shortly.
• Proper palliative care makes euthanasia unnecessary.
• There is no way of properly regulating euthanasia.
• Allowing euthanasia will lead to less good care for the terminally ill.
• Allowing euthanasia undermines the commitment of doctors and nurses to save lives.
• Euthanasia may become a cost-effective way to treat the terminally ill.
• Allowing euthanasia will discourage the search for new cures and treatments for the terminally ill.
• Euthanasia gives too much power to doctors.

Euthanasia in India

Passive euthanasia is legal in India. On 7 March 2011, the Supreme Court of India legalized passive euthanasia using 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 had been in a Persistent Vegetative State (PVS) for 42 years until she died in 2015.

The Aruna Shanbaug Case

In March 2011, the Supreme Court of India passed a historic judgment permitting Passive Euthanasia in the country. This judgment was passed after 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:

• The brain-dead for whom the ventilator can be switched off.
• 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 judgment law also asked for the scrapping of 309 , the code that penalizes those who survive suicide attempts. In December 2014, the Government of India declared its intention.

UPSC Prelims Test Series 2024

Take All-India Mock Exams: Analyse Your Progress!

PIL filed by Common Cause

However, on 25 February 2014, a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court of India termed the judgment in the Aruna Shanbaug case to be ‘inconsistent in itself’ and referred the issue of euthanasia to its five-judge Constitution bench on a PIL filed by Common Cause , which case is the basis of the current debate.

Then, the CJI referred to an earlier Constitution Bench judgment which, in the Gian Kaur case , “did not express any binding view on the subject of euthanasia; rather it reiterated that the legislature would be the appropriate authority to bring change.” Though that judgment said the right to live with dignity under Article 21 was inclusive of the right to die with dignity, it did not conclude the validity of euthanasia, be it active or passive.

“So, the only judgment that holds the field about euthanasia in India is the ruling in the Aruna Shanbaug case, which upholds the validity of passive euthanasia and lays down an elaborate procedure for executing the same on the wrong premise that the Constitution Bench in Gian Kaur had upheld the same,” the CJI said.

Common Cause Case: In 2018, the Supreme Court issued a significant judgment in the Common Cause case. The court recognized the right to die with dignity as a fundamental right and permitted passive euthanasia. It provided guidelines for the process and conditions under which passive euthanasia could be allowed.

Government’s endorsement of Passive Euthanasia

On December 23, 2014, the Government of India endorsed and re-validated the Passive Euthanasia judgment law in a Press Release, after stating in the Rajya Sabha as follows: The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, 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 Hon’ble Supreme Court has already laid down the guidelines, these should be followed and treated as law in such cases. At present, there is no legislation on this subject and the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court is binding on all.

The court rejected active euthanasia using 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 to end life, is still illegal in India, and in most countries.

As India had no law about euthanasia, the Supreme Court’s guidelines are law until and unless Parliament passes legislation. The following guidelines were laid down:

• A decision has to be taken to discontinue life support either by the parents 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 approval from the High Court concerned.
• 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 whether to approve or not. A committee of three reputed doctors to be nominated by the Bench, will report 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.

A law commission had proposed legislation on “passive euthanasia”, it said. According to the Centre, the decision to come out with a bill was taken after considering the directives of the apex court, the law commission’s 241st report, and a private member bill introduced in Parliament in 2014.

The Centre said that initially, a meeting was held under the chairmanship of B.P. Sharma, secretary in the Health and Family Welfare Ministry, on May 22, 2015, to examine the draft of The Medical Treatment of Terminally Ill Patients (Protection of Patients and Medical Practitioners) Bill and the draft of The Euthanasia (Regulation) Bill.

This move to introduce a bill is a welcome step to clear the grey areas in the Euthanasia debate. Students can also link to this issue while answering questions on:

• Judicial activism: SC framing laws when the parliament hasn’t. Just like the Visaka case.
• Ethical dilemma in Paper 4 .

In India,  euthanasia has no legal aspect , and there is no penal law yet introduced in the IPC that specifically deals with euthanasia.

• However, the Supreme Court of India legalized passive euthanasia in 2018 with some conditions, allowing patients to withdraw medical support if they go into an irreversible coma.
• Passive euthanasia is a matter of ‘living will’, and an adult in their conscious mind is permitted to refuse medical treatment or voluntarily decide not to take medical treatment to embrace death naturally, under certain conditions.
• Individuals are only allowed to draft a living will while in a normal state of health and mind.
• Active euthanasia remains illegal in India.

Read:  Living wills

Article by: Jishnu J Raju

Aim IAS, IPS, or IFS?

Prelims cum Mains (PCM) GS Course: Target UPSC CSE 2025 (Online)

₹95000 ₹59000

Prelims cum Mains (PCM) GS Course: Target UPSC CSE 2026 (Online)

₹115000 ₹69000

Prelims cum Mains (PCM) GS Course: Target UPSC CSE 2027 (Online)

₹125000 ₹79000

About ClearIAS Team

ClearIAS is one of the most trusted learning platforms in India for UPSC preparation. Around 1 million aspirants learn from the ClearIAS every month.

Our courses and training methods are different from traditional coaching. We give special emphasis on smart work and personal mentorship. Many UPSC toppers thank ClearIAS for our role in their success.

Download the ClearIAS mobile apps now to supplement your self-study efforts with ClearIAS smart-study training.

Reader Interactions

February 11, 2016 at 3:48 pm

excellent one..

February 24, 2016 at 8:34 pm

Giving passive euthanasia to a patient who is already dead (not literally) is a right choice.Its better than making them as well as others to suffer.

July 20, 2017 at 4:28 pm

so very true.

July 1, 2016 at 10:58 pm

If the patient does not wants to suffer and himself asking for euthanasia then voluntary euthanasia should be made legal because it will be difficult for him to live than to die. But in case of involuntary euthanasia, there should be some specific time limit upto which the patient’s relatives must wait for him to recover but if there is no improvement like in case of coma , after 7-10 years , there is less chances of the patient to recover. In such cases , involuntary euthanasia should be made legal.

March 16, 2017 at 12:37 pm

no it is not possible If the patient tends to recover over a period of time or suddenly he becomes normal then the involuntary euthanasia will become very dangerous

March 16, 2017 at 12:35 pm

Very Very Useful

June 26, 2018 at 8:12 am

Helpful source I can use to rely on research. Thank you so much, clear IAS.

May 17, 2019 at 9:58 pm

Thanku for quality content

May 23, 2020 at 10:27 pm

“Mercy Killing ” is a responsible debate . It mainly depends on persons will on his /her life.

July 2, 2020 at 2:26 pm

Euthanasia should not be accepted as there is always some hope for better.

May 24, 2021 at 11:57 am

If under Article 21 of the constitution, right to live with dignity is inclusive of right to die with dignity, then why should the provisions under the Euthanasia act be restricted to the old and dying patients. There are a lot of people in their 60s and 70s with limited financial resources, who feel neglected / unwanted by the family who would like to die with dignity rather than be dependent on their children or the other members of family. They may be in good health but would still like to self determine to end their life with dignity. In such cases the law should allow for such people to adopt active Euthanasia. Such people could be persuaded to donate their organs which will help save other lives.

August 25, 2021 at 9:40 am

euthanasia cannot be legalised because of its higher probability of misuse. whether it is for property, money or because of any family problem

August 4, 2022 at 12:11 pm

A thought for all: If you do not have a choice to life, i.e. choose to be born then how can choosing your own means of death, be fair or valid? Something you cannot create or re-created is not yours to manage. My say: God is the giver of life and He alone should take it. Our sufferings are a means of learning, loving, understanding and above all our closeness to Almighty God.

June 28, 2023 at 6:36 pm

ur death is already written whether you take it or god does so doesnt matter

September 19, 2022 at 12:47 pm

I can’t put my dog to sleep for I am as old as he; and despite our handicaps he also wants to live like me.

Boghos L. Artinian

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Don’t lose out without playing the right game!

Follow the ClearIAS Prelims cum Mains (PCM) Integrated Approach.

Join ClearIAS PCM Course Now

UPSC Online Preparation

• Union Public Service Commission (UPSC)
• Indian Administrative Service (IAS)
• Indian Police Service (IPS)
• IAS Exam Eligibility
• UPSC Free Study Materials
• UPSC Exam Guidance
• UPSC Prelims Test Series
• UPSC Syllabus
• UPSC Online
• UPSC Prelims
• UPSC Interview
• UPSC Toppers
• UPSC Previous Year Qns
• UPSC Age Calculator
• UPSC Calendar 2024
• About ClearIAS
• ClearIAS Programs
• ClearIAS Fee Structure
• IAS Coaching
• UPSC Coaching
• UPSC Online Coaching
• ClearIAS Blog
• Important Updates
• Announcements
• Book Review
• ClearIAS App
• Work with us
• Advertise with us
• Privacy Policy
• Terms and Conditions
• Talk to Your Mentor

Featured on

and many more...

IAS/IPS/IFS Online Coaching: Target CSE 2025

Are you struggling to finish the upsc cse syllabus without proper guidance, take clearias mock exams: analyse your progress.

Analyse Your Performance and Track Your All-India Ranking

• IAS Preparation
• UPSC Preparation Strategy
• Euthanasia Or Mercy Killing

Euthanasia or Mercy Killing- Moral Dilemma!

Euthanasia refers to the practice of intentionally ending a life in order to relieve pain and suffering. It is categorized as voluntary, non-voluntary and involuntary. Euthanasia can be further classified into active or passive ones. Active euthanasia is an intentional act to deliberately kill a terminally ill patient using various means whereas passive euthanasia happens when medical treatment is removed purposefully resulting in a person’s death to relieve him from unending pain. Until now euthanasia is not legalized in India.

Why in news-

• In 2016 Government proposed a draft bill on passive euthanasia for the first time called “The Medical Treatment of Terminally Ill Patients (Protection of Patients and Medical Practitioners) Bill”.
• Time and again widely debated across the media after the supreme court verdict on the Aruna Shanbaug case.

  Aspirants would find this article very helpful while preparing for the  UPSC 2022 .

What is Euthanasia?

The phrase “euthanasia” was coined by Sir Francis Bacon. It is also called as ‘mercy killing’ . The term “Euthanasia” has been derived from the two Greek words ‘eu’ and ‘thanotos’, which literally means ‘good death’.

Euthanasia is the practice of intentionally ending a life in order to relieve  pain  and  suffering (provided motive should be good & death must be painless as much as possible)                                                       or

 “A deliberate intervention was undertaken with the express intention of ending a life, to relieve intractable suffering.” – British House of Lords Select Committee on Medical Ethics.

Broad classification-

• Voluntary Euthanasia  (with patients’ consent ) – euthanasia is performed with the patients consent. It is legal in some countries like Belgium, Netherlands, etc.
• Non-voluntary Euthanasia  (patient’s consent unavailable) –  where a person is unable to give their consent (for example –the patient is in a state of coma or are severely brain-damaged) and another person takes the decision on their behalf, often because the ill person had expressed a wish previously to end their life in such circumstances.
• Involuntary Euthanasia  (without asking consent or against the patient’s will) – Euthanasia conducted against the will of the patient is termed involuntary euthanasia. It is also regarded as murder.

         All types of euthanasia can be further divided into passive or active types-

a) Active Euthanasia – where a person intentionally intervenes to end someone’s life with the use of lethal substances or forces.

              For example- Administering a lethal injection to end life.

b) Passive Euthanasia –  where a person causes death by withholding or withdrawing treatment that is essential to maintain life.

             For example- stoppage of antibiotics treatment in certain cases where it is necessary for the continuance of life, removal of life support system, etc

Debate- moral dilemma

Arguments For Euthanasia- According to euthanasia opponent Ezekiel Emanuel , proponents of euthanasia have presented four main arguments:

a) That people have a right to self-determination, and thus should be allowed to choose their own destiny.

b) Assisting a subject to die is a better option than continuing to suffer.

c) The distinction between passive euthanasia( which is frequently allowed) and active euthanasia is not substantive (the underlying principle–the doctrine of double effect is unreasonable) and

d) Allowing euthanasia will not necessarily lead to unacceptable consequences. Pro-euthanasia activists often take examples of countries like the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, etc. where euthanasia has been legalized to justify that it is mostly trouble-free.

Check the relevant links to prepare for the UPSC exam even better –

Other arguments-

Arguments based on rights

• People got an explicit right to die
• Death is a private subject and if there is no harm done to others then, the state and other people have no right to interfere (libertarian case)

Practical arguments –

• Death is a private subject and if there is no harm done to others then, the state and other people have no right to interfere (libertarian case)
• Allowing people to die may free up scarce health resources (this is a possible argument, but so far no authority has seriously proposed it)

  Arguments Against Euthanasia

Similarly, Emanuel argues that there are four major arguments presented by opponents of euthanasia:

• All deaths are not painful.
• Termination of active treatment, combined with the effective use of pain relief are available as alternatives to euthanasia
• The distinction between active and passive euthanasia is morally significant and
• Legalizing euthanasia will put society on a slippery slope, which will lead to unacceptable consequences. (In Oregon 2013, the pain wasn’t one of the top five reasons that people sought euthanasia for. In fact, it was a loss of dignity, and a fear of burdening others).

Ethical arguments

• Euthanasia could weaken society’s respect for the sanctity of life.
• Accepting euthanasia would mean that some lives (those of the sick or disabled) are worth less than others.
• Voluntary euthanasia could start on a slippery slope that may lead to involuntary euthanasia and the killing of people who are thought undesirable.
• Euthanasia might not be in a person’s best interests.
• Euthanasia affects the rights of  other people and not just those of the patient

Religious arguments- Religions are opposed to euthanasia for a number of reasons.

a) Euthanasia is  against the will and word of God . (God has forbidden it)

• Virtually all religions in their scriptures say ‘you must not kill’. Therefore carrying out any of these would be against God’s command, and would be an attack on the sovereignty of God

b) Euthanasia weakens society’s respect for the  sanctity of life .

• Human life is sacred. Human lives are special because God created them. Human beings are made in God’s image. Therefore human life should be protected and preserved, whatever happens

c) law of karma – Suffering may have value (Freedom from worldly life)

• Hinduism and Buddhism see mortal life as part of a continuing cycle in which we take birth, live, die, and are reborn over and over again.
• D uring each cycle of life and death, human beings make progress towards their ultimate aim, which is liberation.
• Thus, shortening life interferes with the law of karma.

d) Voluntary euthanasia could start on a slippery slope that may lead to involuntary euthanasia and the killing of people who are thought undesirable

e) Most religions disapprove of euthanasia. Some absolutely forbid it.

For example, the Roman Catholic church is one of the most active organizations in opposing euthanasia.

f) Virtually all religions state that those who become vulnerable through illness or disability deserve special care and protection, and proper care of life is a much better thing than euthanasia.

  g) Non-harm – the principle of ahimsa- Hinduism and Buddhism regard all life as precious. (not just human life). They say that we should try to avoid harming living things and therefore this also rules out killing people, even if they want to die.

Practical arguments

• Proper palliative care could make euthanasia unnecessary.
• Euthanasia cannot be properly regulated
• Permitting euthanasia will lead to less good care for the terminally ill.
• Permitting euthanasia could undermine the commitment of doctors and nurses to save lives.
• Euthanasia may become in the future a cost-effective way to treat the terminally ill.
• Allowing euthanasia could discourage the search for new modes of treatment for the terminally ill.
• Euthanasia could discourage the motivation to provide good care for the dying.
• Euthanasia gives too much authority to doctors.
• Euthanasia exposes vulnerable people to pressure to end their lives.
• Moral pressure on elderly people by selfish families.
• Moral pressure to free up medical resources.
• Patients may feel euthanasia is the only way out when they are abandoned by their families.

                                                                 Indian scenario

The Medical Treatment of Terminally Ill Patients (Protection of Patients and Medical Practitioners) Bill

• Advance medical directive-  also called a  living will . It means a directive given by a  person that he/she as the case may be shall or shall not be given medical treatment in the future when he/she becomes terminally ill.
• Palliative care –

a) Provision of reasonable medical and nursing procedures for relief of physical pain, suffering, discomfort, or emotional or psychosocial suffering.

b)  A reasonable provision for food and water.

• Competent patient –  a patient who is not an incompetent patient.
• Incompetent patient- means a minor who is below 16 years of age or of unsound mind or a patient who is unable to-

a) understand information relevant to an informed decision about his/her medical treatment.

b) Retain and use that information to make decisions

c) Not able to make an informed decision due to disturbance in the functioning of the brain/mind.

d) Communicate his /her informed decision by speech, sign, language, or any other mode.

• Informed decision- means the decision as to continuance or withholding or withdrawing medical treatment taken by a patient who is competent and who is or has been informed about-

a) The nature of his/her illness

b) Any alternative form of treatment that is available

c) The consequences of those forms of treatment and

d) Consequences of remaining untreated

• Terminal illness- such illness/injury/degeneration of physical or mental condition which is causing extreme pain and suffering to the patients and according to the medical opinion will inevitably cause the untimely death of the patient concerned

      Meaningful existence of life is not possible due to irreversible vegetative condition.

Salient Provisions of the Draft Bill

• Every competent patient, including minors aged above 16 years, has a right to make a decision and express their desire to the medical practitioner attending on her or him on whether to continue further treatment or allow nature to take its own course.
• The Bill provides protection to patients and doctors from any liability for withholding or withdrawing medical treatment and states that palliative care (pain management) can continue.
• When a patient communicates her or his decision to the medical practitioner, such a decision is binding on the medical practitioner. However, it also notes that the medical practitioner must be “satisfied” that the patient is “competent” and that the decision has been taken on free will.
• There will be a panel of medical experts to decide on a case by case basis.
• The medical practitioner has to maintain all details of the patient and ensure he/she takes an informed decision. He is also required to inform the patient whether it would be best to withdraw or continue treatment. If the patient is not in a conscious state, he/she needs to inform family members. In the absence of family members, the medical practitioner needs to inform a person who is a regular visitor.
• The draft also lays down the process for seeking euthanasia, right from the composition of the medical team to move the high court for permission.
• Permission to be obtained from the high court. Any near relative, friend, legal guardian, medical doctor/staff attending the patient, any other person obtaining the leave of the court can apply to the jurisdictional high court. Such an application is treated as an original petition and the chief justice of the high court shall assign the same to the divisional bench without loss of time and the same should be disposed of as far as practical within a month. This bench will nominate and need a report from a committee of three reputed doctors.
• The Bill only portends to legalize what is called “passive euthanasia”, as discussed in the judgement pertaining to Aruna Shaunbaug. Active euthanasia is not being considered “as it is likely to be used by unscrupulous individuals to attain their ulterior motives.”
• Advanced medical directive or living will be void and not binding on any medical practitioner.
• The medical council of India may issue guidelines consistent with the provisions of the bill. It may review and  can also modify from time to time

Probable concerns- There have been mixed reactions to the draft bill. Some consider it a “good start”, but others didn’t quite agree. Some of the probable concerns are-

• The draft has disappointed experts who wanted complete clarity on the concept of a living will . While there have been demands for recognizing Advance Medical Directives (also known as a living will) whereby a person declares in advance whether or not treatment should be given if he is terminally-ill and incompetent to take decisions in the future, the government has rightly shot down the proposal.
• Child rights activists opine that in India, signing a contract or marrying before the age of 18 is not permitted, then how can a child decide to live or die.
• concerns for its misuse remain a major issue which ought to be addressed before it becomes a law in our country-

a) Doctors may come under the influence of corruption and fabricate material to prove that it is a terminal case with no chance of recovery.

b) Leaving it solely to the patient’s relatives or to the doctors or next friend to decide whether to withdraw the life support of an incompetent person, there is always a risk that this may be misused by some unscrupulous persons who wish to inherit or otherwise grab the property of the patient.

What is a “living will” and what are debates and arguments in relation to a living will?

 In 2014, the Supreme Court had issued notice to all the states seeking their views on whether a terminally ill person can execute a “living will” that his or her life support system be withdrawn if he or she reaches a vegetative state with no hope of revival. The court has also appointed amicus curiae.

A Living Will is a document that sets out a patient’s wishes regarding health care and how they want to be treated if they become seriously ill and unable to make or communicate their own choices . Living wills are also called as active declarations .

Arguments For living will-

• They respect the patient’s human rights, and in particular their right to reject medical treatment.
• Creating them encourages full discussion about end of life decisions.
• Knowing what the patient want means that doctors are more likely to give appropriate treatment.
• They help medical professionals in taking difficult decisions.
• A patient’s family and friends don’t have to take the difficult decisions

Arguments against a living will-

• Writing them may be very depressing.
• It’s difficult for a healthy person adequately to imagine what they would really want in the situations where a living will take effect.
• It may be hard to translate the words of the living will into actual medical action.
• Patients may change their minds but not change their living wills.
• They’re no use if they can’t be found quickly when needed.

In India attempt to commit suicides (Section 309 of the Indian Penal Code ) and abetment of suicide( Section 306 of the IPC) are crimes and both actions are punishable. The problem is that to be able to make a living will, the legislation would need to decriminalize both.  Though the court should consider the legitimacy of a will, there are several issues. For example, if the death of the patient is of material value to those are who close to him/her (such as property), the suspicion over the validity of the living can become a legal issue. Thus, there is a need to carefully set up conditions under which a living will be executed.

Summary- There is no point in prolonging the physical agony of a terminally ill person and the mental trauma of their loved ones. Therefore, euthanasia should be made legal in cases where there is no scope of a patient recovering. India however requires a mix of sensitivity and maturity for such an important decision to be taken as it involves ‘right to life’ and ‘right to die with dignity’.

  “He who has health has hope, and he who has hope has everything”.-Arabic Proverb

How to approach for the Civil Services Examination

Death is a private matter and if there is no harm to others, the state has no right to interfere.

Human life is sacred. Irrespective of the pain and suffering, human life should be protected and preserved.

GS Paper II- Health-related aspect (public health and safety. Welfare etc)

Practice Questions –

In Prelims-

Which of the following statement is /are correct

• Article 21 of the constitution also deals with the right to die.
• The draft bill legalizes active euthanasia in India.
• According to the draft bill on passive euthanasia, the advanced medical directive shall be void and not binding on any medical practitioner.
• The draft Bill also provides for active euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide in certain cases.

GS paper II-

• Is passive euthanasia finally going to be a reality in India? Discuss?
• Critics of euthanasia claim that Voluntary euthanasia is the start of a slippery slope that leads to involuntary euthanasia and the killing of people who are considered undesirable. Critically discuss?
• Allowing euthanasia undermines the commitment of doctors and nurses to save lives. Critically discuss?

FAQ about Euthanasia or Mercy Killing

Is euthanasia legal in india, what are the different types of euthanasia.

UPSC exam related links are given below for candidates convenience in the preparation.

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Your Mobile number and Email id will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Request OTP on Voice Call

Post My Comment

IAS 2024 - Your dream can come true!

Download the ultimate guide to upsc cse preparation.

• Share Share

Register with BYJU'S & Download Free PDFs

Register with byju's & watch live videos.

• OUR CENTERS Bangalore Delhi Lucknow Mysuru Srinagar Dharwad Hyderabad

Call us @ 08069405205

Search Here

• An Introduction to the CSE Exam
• Personality Test
• Annual Calendar by UPSC-2024
• Common Myths about the Exam
• About Insights IAS
• Our Mission, Vision & Values
• Director's Desk
• Meet Our Team
• Our Branches
• Careers at Insights IAS
• Daily Current Affairs+PIB Summary
• Insights into Editorials
• Insta Revision Modules for Prelims
• Current Affairs Quiz
• Static Quiz
• Current Affairs RTM
• Insta-DART(CSAT)
• Insta 75 Days Revision Tests for Prelims 2024
• Secure (Mains Answer writing)
• Secure Synopsis
• Ethics Case Studies
• Insta Ethics
• Weekly Essay Challenge
• Insta Revision Modules-Mains
• Insta 75 Days Revision Tests for Mains
• Secure (Archive)
• Anthropology
• Law Optional
• Kannada Literature
• Public Administration
• English Literature
• Medical Science
• Mathematics
• Commerce & Accountancy
• Monthly Magazine: CURRENT AFFAIRS 30
• Content for Mains Enrichment (CME)
• InstaMaps: Important Places in News
• Weekly CA Magazine
• The PRIME Magazine
• Insta Revision Modules-Prelims
• Insta-DART(CSAT) Quiz
• Insta 75 days Revision Tests for Prelims 2022
• Insights SECURE(Mains Answer Writing)
• Interview Transcripts
• Previous Years' Question Papers-Prelims
• Answer Keys for Prelims PYQs
• Solve Prelims PYQs
• Previous Years' Question Papers-Mains
• UPSC CSE Syllabus
• Toppers from Insights IAS
• Testimonials
• Felicitation
• UPSC Results
• Indian Heritage & Culture
• Ancient Indian History
• Medieval Indian History
• Modern Indian History
• World History
• World Geography
• Indian Geography
• Indian Society
• Social Justice
• International Relations
• Agriculture
• Environment & Ecology
• Disaster Management
• Science & Technology
• Security Issues
• Ethics, Integrity and Aptitude

• Indian Heritage & Culture
• Enivornment & Ecology

The ethics of euthanasia

Context : In a recent incident, a Bengaluru woman goes to Delhi HC to stop a friend’s euthanasia trip to Europe.

According to a petition filed before the court, the man has been suffering from Chronic Fatigue Syndrome since 2014 and is allegedly planning to travel to Switzerland for physician-assisted suicide as the option is not available in India.

Euthanasia:

The term “euthanasia” is derived from Greek, literally meaning “good death”. Taken in its common usage, however, euthanasia refers to the termination of a person’s life, to end their suffering, usually from an incurable or terminal condition . It is for this reason that euthanasia was also coined the name “mercy killing”.

Types of Euthanasia:

Acts of euthanasia are further categorized as “ voluntary”, “involuntary” and “non-voluntary.”

• Voluntary euthanasia refers to euthanasia performed at the request of the patient.
• Involuntary euthanasia is the term used to describe the situation where euthanasia is performed when the patient does not request it, with the intent of relieving their suffering – which, in effect, amounts to murder.
• Non-voluntary euthanasia relates to a situation where euthanasia is performed when the patient is incapable of consenting.

Arguments for and against euthanasia

• it is argued that as part of our human rights, there is a right to make our own decisions and a right to a dignified death.
• Advocates of euthanasia express the view that the fundamental moral values of society, compassion and mercy, require that no patient be allowed to suffer unbearably, and mercy killing should be permissible.
• Supporters of euthanasia claim that active euthanasia is not morally worse than passive euthanasia – the withdrawal or withholding of medical treatments that result in a patient’s death. In line with this view, it is argued that active euthanasia should be permitted just as passive euthanasia is allowed.
• Religious proponents argue that “it is the sole prerogative of God to bestow life and to cause death.
• Society views an action which has a primary intention of killing another person as inherently wrong, in spite of the patient’s consent
• It has also been argued that patients’ requests for euthanasia are rarely autonomous, as most terminally ill patients may not be of a sound or rational mind.
• Kant and Mill believe that the principle of autonomy forbids the voluntary ending of the conditions necessary for autonomy, which would occur by ending one’s life.
• It is often argued that pain and suffering experienced by patients can be relieved by administering appropriate palliative care, making euthanasia a futile measure
• If euthanasia were to become an accepted practice, it may give rise to situations that undermine the rights of vulnerable patients.
• Active voluntary euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide undermine the doctor-patient relationship, destroying the trust and confidence built in such a relationship.

Legal Status of Euthanasia

Euthanasia is illegal in most countries (e.g. UK, USA).

SC (Gian Kaur v. State of Punjab)  it was held by the five judge bench of the Supreme Court that the “right to life” guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution does not include the “ right to die ”.

• In India, like almost in other countries, euthanasia has no legal aspect.

Distinguishing euthanasia from suicide :  Suicide by its nature is an act of self-killing or self-destruction, an act of terminating one’s own act and without the aid or assistance of any other human agency.

• Indian Penal Code further punishes not only abetment of homicide, but also abetment of suicide.

Chronic fatigue syndrome: Also known as myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME/CFS ), Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, is a serious and debilitating disease that affects the nervous system, the immune system and the body’s production of energy, according to the US Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

• Our Mission, Vision & Values
• Director’s Desk
• Commerce & Accountancy
• Previous Years’ Question Papers-Prelims
• Previous Years’ Question Papers-Mains
• Environment & Ecology
• Science & Technology

Euthanasia and Ethical Issues: Understanding Advocacy, Opposition, and Legal Considerations

Table of Contents

Euthanasia and Ethical Issues

(relevant for ethics, integrity and aptitude).

The subject of euthanasia is immersed in extensive ethical debates and uncertainties. Different forms of euthanasia exist, with active voluntary euthanasia, assisted suicide, and physician-assisted suicide being the most contentious ones. In general, these terms are employed to refer to the deliberate ending of a person’s life to alleviate their suffering, often through the administration of drugs. The ethical aspects related to euthanasia include the following:

Advocates of euthanasia believe that:

• An individual who faces a situation without hope of recovery should have the autonomy to decide how and when to end their life.
• In a civilized society, individuals should have the opportunity to pass away with dignity and without unnecessary pain. If they are unable to do so independently, others should be allowed to assist them.
• Our bodies belong to us, and we have the right to decide what happens to them.
• Forcing people to continue living in agony and distress goes against personal freedom and violates their human rights.
• It is considered immoral to compel individuals to endure suffering and pain against their will.
• As suicide is not considered a crime, euthanasia should not be viewed as one either.

Opponents of euthanasia argue the following points:

• From a religious perspective, opponents believe that life is a gift from God, and only God should determine the end of life.
• They express concerns that if euthanasia becomes legal, there might be potential abuses of the laws, leading to the involuntary euthanasia of individuals who did not genuinely desire to die.
• Euthanasia is currently illegal in the majority of countries.
• Some opponents argue that intentionally killing another person, even if it is done at their request, should be considered murder.

Moreover, critics suggest that providing good palliative care can effectively alleviate suffering for patients, making euthanasia unnecessary in modern medicine.

• While autonomy is often cited by proponents of euthanasia, it is also used as an argument against it. Philosophers like Kant and Mill assert that the principle of autonomy prohibits voluntarily ending the necessary conditions for autonomy, which would occur by ending one’s life.
• Advocates for the right to life dismiss claims that there is a right to die.

Some best practices to navigate these ethical dilemmas are:

• The laws should be responsive to the changing cultural norms and values of society.
• Active euthanasia should not be permitted under any circumstances until it is explicitly prohibited by law.
• On March 9, 2018, the Supreme Court of India legalized passive euthanasia, which involves removing life support from patients in a permanent vegetative state. This decision was reached as part of the verdict in a case involving Aruna Shanbaug, who remained in a Persistent Vegetative State (PVS) until her death in 2015.
• The doctrine of double effect justifies the unintentional death of a patient resulting from an action taken with the primary intention of relieving pain. This theory offers a potential resolution to the ethical quandary surrounding euthanasia.
• Kant’s prohibition of suicide and euthanasia arises from his conflation of respect for individuals and respect for humanity as a whole. He assumes that killing a person, whether oneself or another, undermines the concept of personhood.

To master these intricacies and fare well in the Sociology Optional Syllabus , aspiring sociologists might benefit from guidance by the Best Sociology Optional Teacher and participation in the Best Sociology Optional Coaching . These avenues provide comprehensive assistance, ensuring a solid understanding of sociology’s diverse methodologies and techniques.

Sociology Optional Syllabus Course Commencement Information

• Enrolment is limited to a maximum of 250 Seats.
• Batch Timing: Evening Batch
• Course Duration: 4.5 Months
• Admission Open For Online/Offline Batch

Book Your Seat Fast Book Your Seat Fast

We would like to hear from you. Please send us a message by filling out the form below and we will get back with you shortly.

Instructional Format:

• Each class session is scheduled for a duration of two hours.
• At the conclusion of each lecture, an assignment will be distributed by Vikash Ranjan Sir for Paper-I & Paper-II coverage.

Study Material:

• A set of printed booklets will be provided for each topic. These materials are succinct, thoroughly updated, and tailored for examination preparation.
• A compilation of previous years’ question papers (spanning the last 27 years) will be supplied for answer writing practice.
• Access to PDF versions of toppers’ answer booklets will be available on our website.
• Post-course, you will receive two practice workbooks containing a total of 10 sets of mock test papers based on the UPSC format for self-assessment.

Additional Provisions:

• In the event of missed classes, video lectures will be temporarily available on the online portal for reference.
• Daily one-on-one doubt resolution sessions with Vikash Ranjan Sir will be organized post-class.

Syllabus of Sociology Optional

FUNDAMENTALS OF SOCIOLOGY

• Modernity and social changes in Europe and emergence of sociology.
• Scope of the subject and comparison with other social sciences.
• Sociology and common sense.
• Science, scientific method and critique.
• Major theoretical strands of research methodology.
• Positivism and its critique.
• Fact value and objectivity.
• Non- positivist methodologies.
• Qualitative and quantitative methods.
• Techniques of data collection.
• Variables, sampling, hypothesis, reliability and validity.
• Karl Marx- Historical materialism, mode of production, alienation, class struggle.
• Emile Durkheim- Division of labour, social fact, suicide, religion and society.
• Max Weber- Social action, ideal types, authority, bureaucracy, protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism.
• Talcott Parsons- Social system, pattern variables.
• Robert K. Merton- Latent and manifest functions, conformity and deviance, reference groups.
• Mead – Self and identity.
• Concepts- equality, inequality, hierarchy, exclusion, poverty and deprivation.
• Theories of social stratification- Structural functionalist theory, Marxist theory, Weberian theory.
• Dimensions – Social stratification of class, status groups, gender, ethnicity and race.
• Social mobility- open and closed systems, types of mobility, sources and causes of mobility.
• Social organization of work in different types of society- slave society, feudal society, industrial /capitalist society
• Formal and informal organization of work.
• Labour and society.
• Sociological theories of power.
• Power elite, bureaucracy, pressure groups, and political parties.
• Nation, state, citizenship, democracy, civil society, ideology.
• Protest, agitation, social movements, collective action, revolution.
• Sociological theories of religion.
• Types of religious practices: animism, monism, pluralism, sects, cults.
• Religion in modern society: religion and science, secularization, religious revivalism, fundamentalism.
• Family, household, marriage.
• Types and forms of family.
• Lineage and descent.
• Patriarchy and sexual division of labour.
• Contemporary trends.
• Sociological theories of social change.
• Development and dependency.
• Agents of social change.
• Education and social change.
• Science, technology and social change.

INDIAN SOCIETY: STRUCTURE AND CHANGE

Introducing indian society.

• Indology (GS. Ghurye).
• Structural functionalism (M N Srinivas).
• Marxist sociology (A R Desai).
• Social background of Indian nationalism.
• Modernization of Indian tradition.
• Protests and movements during the colonial period.
• Social reforms.

SOCIAL STRUCTURE

• The idea of Indian village and village studies.
• Agrarian social structure – evolution of land tenure system, land reforms.
• Perspectives on the study of caste systems: GS Ghurye, M N Srinivas, Louis Dumont, Andre Beteille.
• Features of caste system.
• Untouchability – forms and perspectives.
• Definitional problems.
• Geographical spread.
• Colonial policies and tribes.
• Issues of integration and autonomy.
• Social Classes in India:
• Agrarian class structure.
• Industrial class structure.
• Middle classes in India.
• Lineage and descent in India.
• Types of kinship systems.
• Family and marriage in India.
• Household dimensions of the family.
• Patriarchy, entitlements and sexual division of labour
• Religious communities in India.
• Problems of religious minorities.

SOCIAL CHANGES IN INDIA

• Idea of development planning and mixed economy
• Constitution, law and social change.
• Programmes of rural development, Community Development Programme, cooperatives,poverty alleviation schemes
• Green revolution and social change.
• Changing modes of production in Indian agriculture.
• Problems of rural labour, bondage, migration.

3. Industrialization and Urbanisation in India:

• Evolution of modern industry in India.
• Growth of urban settlements in India.
• Working class: structure, growth, class mobilization.
• Informal sector, child labour
• Slums and deprivation in urban areas.

4. Politics and Society:

• Nation, democracy and citizenship.
• Political parties, pressure groups , social and political elite
• Regionalism and decentralization of power.
• Secularization

5. Social Movements in Modern India:

• Peasants and farmers movements.
• Women’s movement.
• Backward classes & Dalit movement.
• Environmental movements.
• Ethnicity and Identity movements.

6. Population Dynamics:

• Population size, growth, composition and distribution
• Components of population growth: birth, death, migration.
• Population policy and family planning.
• Emerging issues: ageing, sex ratios, child and infant mortality, reproductive health.

7. Challenges of Social Transformation:

• Crisis of development: displacement, environmental problems and sustainability
• Poverty, deprivation and inequalities.
• Violence against women.
• Caste conflicts.
• Ethnic conflicts, communalism, religious revivalism.
• Illiteracy and disparities in education.

Mr. Vikash Ranjan, arguably the Best Sociology Optional Teacher , has emerged as a versatile genius in teaching and writing books on Sociology & General Studies. His approach to the Sociology Optional Syllabus / Sociology Syllabus is remarkable, and his Sociological Themes and Perspectives are excellent. His teaching aptitude is Simple, Easy and Exam Focused. He is often chosen as the Best Sociology Teacher for Sociology Optional UPSC aspirants.

About Triumph IAS

Innovating Knowledge, Inspiring Success We, at Triumph IAS , pride ourselves on being the best sociology optional coaching platform. We believe that each Individual Aspirant is unique and requires Individual Guidance and Care, hence the need for the Best Sociology Teacher . We prepare students keeping in mind his or her strength and weakness, paying particular attention to the Sociology Optional Syllabus / Sociology Syllabus , which forms a significant part of our Sociology Foundation Course .

Course Features

Every day, the Best Sociology Optional Teacher spends 2 hours with the students, covering each aspect of the Sociology Optional Syllabus / Sociology Syllabus and the Sociology Course . Students are given assignments related to the Topic based on Previous Year Question to ensure they’re ready for the Sociology Optional UPSC examination.

Regular one-on-one interaction & individual counseling for stress management and refinement of strategy for Exam by Vikash Ranjan Sir , the Best Sociology Teacher , is part of the package. We specialize in sociology optional coaching and are hence fully equipped to guide you to your dream space in the civil service final list.

Specialist Guidance of Vikash Ranjan Sir

Vikash Ranjan Sir is a specialist and arguably the Best Sociology Optional Teacher . His scientific, systematic, applied & exam-focused approach has helped many students to get selected in the Civil Services.

The Best Sociology Teacher helps students to get a complete conceptual understanding of each and every topic of the Sociology Optional Syllabus / Sociology Syllabus , enabling them to attempt any of the questions, be direct or applied, ensuring 300+ Marks in Sociology Optional .

Classrooms Interaction & Participatory Discussion

The Best Sociology Teacher, Vikash Sir , ensures that there’s explanation & DISCUSSION on every topic of the Sociology Optional Syllabus / Sociology Syllabus in the class. The emphasis is not just on teaching but also on understanding, which is why we are known as the Best Sociology Optional Coaching institution.

Preparatory-Study Support

The Sociology Foundation Course is designed to provide students with a strong base for the Sociology Optional . Study support from Triumph IAS & personal mentorship of the Best Sociology Teacher , Vikash Sir, is provided till final selection. Vikash Sir provides special guidance session for “Essay & Mains General Study” too, making our Sociology Course a well-rounded one.

Online Support System (Oss)

Get access to an online forum for value addition study material, journals, and articles relevant to Sociology on www.triumphias.com . Ask preparation related queries directly to the Best Sociology Teacher , Vikash Sir, via mail or WhatsApp.

Strategic Classroom Preparation

Our Sociology Course is characterized by interactive and applied teaching with an “Exam Focussed” approach, which inculcates a Sociological sense and competency in the students. The Sociology Foundation Course , lasting four months, includes theoretical discussion, concept building, and answer writing with a focus on learning & application.

Comprehensive Study Material

We provide printed booklets of concise, well-researched, exam-ready study material for every unit of the Sociology Optional Syllabus / Sociology Syllabus , making us the Best Sociology Optional Coaching platform.

Why Vikash Ranjan’s Classes for Sociology?

Proper guidance and assistance are required to learn the skill of interlinking current happenings with the conventional topics. VIKASH RANJAN SIR at TRIUMPH IAS guides students according to the Recent Trends of UPSC, making him the Best Sociology Teacher for Sociology Optional UPSC.

At Triumph IAS, the Best Sociology Optional Coaching platform, we not only provide the best study material and applied classes for Sociology for IAS but also conduct regular assignments and class tests to assess candidates’ writing skills and understanding of the subject.

Choose T he Best Sociology Optional Teacher for IAS Preparation?

At the beginning of the journey for Civil Services Examination preparation, many students face a pivotal decision – selecting their optional subject. Questions such as “ which optional subject is the best? ” and “ which optional subject is the most scoring? ” frequently come to mind. Choosing the right optional subject, like choosing the best sociology optional teacher , is a subjective yet vital step that requires a thoughtful decision based on facts. A misstep in this crucial decision can indeed prove disastrous.

Ever since the exam pattern was revamped in 2013, the UPSC has eliminated the need for a second optional subject. Now, candidates have to choose only one optional subject for the UPSC Mains , which has two papers of 250 marks each. One of the compelling choices for many has been the sociology optional. However, it’s strongly advised to decide on your optional subject for mains well ahead of time to get sufficient time to complete the syllabus. After all, most students score similarly in General Studies Papers; it’s the score in the optional subject & essay that contributes significantly to the final selection.

“ A sound strategy does not rely solely on the popular Opinion of toppers or famous YouTubers cum teachers. ”

It requires understanding one’s ability, interest, and the relevance of the subject, not just for the exam but also for life in general. Hence, when selecting the best sociology teacher, one must consider the usefulness of sociology optional coaching in General Studies, Essay, and Personality Test.

The choice of the optional subject should be based on objective criteria, such as the nature, scope, and size of the syllabus, uniformity and stability in the question pattern, relevance of the syllabic content in daily life in society, and the availability of study material and guidance. For example, choosing the best sociology optional coaching can ensure access to top-quality study materials and experienced teachers. Always remember, the approach of the UPSC optional subject differs from your academic studies of subjects. Therefore, before settling for sociology optional , you need to analyze the syllabus, previous years’ pattern, subject requirements (be it ideal, visionary, numerical, conceptual theoretical), and your comfort level with the subject.

This decision marks a critical point in your UPSC – CSE journey , potentially determining your success in a career in IAS/Civil Services. Therefore, it’s crucial to choose wisely, whether it’s the optional subject or the best sociology optional teacher . Always base your decision on accurate facts, and never let your emotional biases guide your choices. After all, the search for the best sociology optional coaching is about finding the perfect fit for your unique academic needs and aspirations.

To master these intricacies and fare well in the Sociology Optional Syllabus , aspiring sociologists might benefit from guidance by the Best Sociology Optional Teacher and participation in the Best Sociology Optional Coaching . These avenues provide comprehensive assistance, ensuring a solid understanding of sociology’s diverse methodologies and techniques. Sociology, Social theory, Best Sociology Optional Teacher, Best Sociology Optional Coaching, Sociology Optional Syllabus. Best Sociology Optional Teacher, Sociology Syllabus, Sociology Optional, Sociology Optional Coaching, Best Sociology Optional Coaching, Best Sociology Teacher, Sociology Course, Sociology Teacher, Sociology Foundation, Sociology Foundation Course, Sociology Optional UPSC, Sociology for IAS,

Follow us :

🔎 https://www.instagram.com/triumphias

🔎 www.triumphias.com

🔎https://www.youtube.com/c/TriumphIAS

https://t.me/VikashRanjanSociology

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

General Studies

All Programmes

Study Material

Euthanasia in India

What’s in today’s article?

• Why in News? 
• What is the Concept of Euthanasia?  

What is ‘Living Will’?

• Is Euthanasia Legal in India? 

News Summary

What is the supreme court’s order , why in news   .

• The Supreme Court has removed the condition that managed a magistrate’s approval for withdrawal or withholding of life support to a terminally ill person.

What is the Concept of Euthanasia? 

• The word 'Euthanasia' is derived from Greek words, 'Eu' meaning 'good' and 'thanatos' meaning 'death' , put together it means 'good death '. 
• Euthanasia is defined as the hastening of death of a patient to prevent further sufferings .
• Active euthanasia refers to the physician deliberate act, usually the administration of lethal drugs, to end an incurably or terminally ill patient’s life.
• Voluntary euthanasia – at patient request, 
• Nonvoluntary – without patient consent, 
• Involuntary euthanasia – patient is not in a position to give consent.
• Passive euthanasia refers to withholding or withdrawing treatment which is necessary for maintaining life.
• The “living will” is a person’s right to issue advance directive on the course of his/her treatment, including withdrawal of life support, should such a situation arise . 
• However, there is no way a living will provision can be made fool-proof requiring no intervention of the doctor or immediate decisionmakers around a person.

Is Euthanasia Legal in India?

• A five-judge bench of the Supreme Court in Common Cause vs Union of India (2018) recognised a person’s right to die with dignity, saying that a terminally ill person can opt for passive euthanasia and execute a living will to refuse medical treatment . 
• The Court permitted an individual to draft a living will specifying that she or he will not be put on life support if they slip into an incurable coma .
• The Court recognised the right to die with dignity as a fundamental right and an aspect of Article 21 (Right to Life).
• In India, active euthanasia is a crime. 
• Section 309 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with the attempt to commit suicide and Section 306 of the IPC deals with abetment of suicide – both actions are punishable. 
• Only those who are brain dead can be taken off life support with the help of family members.
• The Supreme Court has modified its order in the 2018 judgement on passive euthanasia. 
• With the modified order, the Court aims to make the procedure of removal of (or withholding) life support from terminally ill patients less cumbersome for the patients, their families and the doctors by limiting the role played by government officials. 

Image Caption: Supreme Court’s Order

• Firstly, the requirement of setting up two medical boards – one primary and other review – to examine the medical condition of the patient has been retained. 
• The Court said both boards will be constituted by the hospital and there would be one nominee doctor of the district medical officer in the review board. 
• The medical board must take a decision on such cases preferably within 48 hours. 
• While the earlier rule stipulated that a living will had to be made in the presence of two attesting witnesses and countersigned by the jurisdictional Judicial Magistrate of First Class (JMFC). 
• The new order says such a will can be attested by notary or a gazetted rank officer.

Q1) What does Article 21 of the Constitution deals with?

Article 21 deals with Protection of life and personal liberty. No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law.

Q2) Which country was the first to legalize Euthanasia? 

Netherlands was the first country to legalize euthanasia.

Source:   SC Simplifies its Rules on Passive Euthanasia  |  Indian Express

© 2024 Vajiram & Ravi. All rights reserved

[email protected]

• Our Centers Delhi Bhubaneswar Lucknow

Free Resources: Topical Analysis

Euthanasia Debate: The Aruna Shanbaug Judgment

Published: 12th Jul, 2019

  Euthanasia is the practice of ending the life of a person in a painless way. It is also known also as mercy killing or assisted suicide, it is usually practiced on a terminally ill person. Euthanasia may be legal or illegal, depending upon a country’s jurisdiction. For example, euthanasia is legal in countries like Belgium, Norway, Sweden and Albania, under the condition that the patient is suffering from chronic pain along with an incurable disease. In the United States, euthanasia is illegal; whatever may be the condition of the patient.

Concept of Right to Life under Indian Constitution

“The Article 21 reads as follows: No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law”.

According to this article Right to Life means the right to lead meaningful, complete and dignified life. It does not have restricted meaning. The object of the fundamental right under Article 21 is to prevent any restriction by the State to a person upon his personal liberty and deprivation of life except according to procedure established by law. 

In India, this issue again came to limelight during Aruna Shahbaug case where  friends and relatives of an ex-nurse who was in vegetative state from 40 years requested the Supreme Court to grant permission to end her misery by invoking euthanasia. However, whether is it appropriate to bring the life of an individual to end is right or not is still debated. It has its own debates both in favour of and against the process.

The Judgment in Aruna Shahbaug case tc " The Judgement in Aruna Shahbaug case"

The Supreme Court of India laid down guidelines for euthanasia and made a distinction between ‘active’ and ‘passive’ euthanasia. It said that causing the death of a person who is in a permanent vegetative state, with no chance of recovery, by withdrawing artificial life support is not a “positive act of killing”, which could be permitted on a case-by-case basis.

“The withdrawal of life support by the doctors is in law considered as an omission and not a positive step to terminate life. The latter would be euthanasia, a criminal offense under the present law in UK, USA and India.”

The court also laid down guidelines for passive euthanasia such as that the matter must be referred to the High Court for a decision and that the doctor, or the parents or spouse of the patient must be the ones to petition for the withdrawal of life-support. In the absence of any of these, a person or a body of persons acting as ‘next friend’ can be permitted.

Whilst the Court has held that there is no right to die (suicide) under Article 21 of the Constitution and attempt to suicide is a crime vide Section 309 IPC, the Court has held that the right to life includes the right to live with human dignity, and in the case of a dying person who is terminally ill or in a permanent vegetative state he may be permitted to terminate.

Ethical Issues in Aruna’s case tc " Ethical Issues in Aruna’s case"

Two of the cardinal principles of medical ethics are Patient Autonomy and Beneficence.

1.     Autonomy means the right to self-determination, where the informed patient has a right to choose the manner of his treatment. To be autonomous the patient should be competent to make decisions and choices.

2.     Beneficence is acting in what is (or judged to be) in patient’s best interest. Acting in the patient’s best interest means following a course of action that is best for the patient, and is not influenced by personal convictions, motives or other considerations.

However in the present case, as no indication of Aruna Shanbaug’s views or wishes with respect to life-sustaining treatments for a permanent vegetative state, any decision regarding her treatment will have to be taken by a surrogate i.e. the staff of the KEM hospital have looked after her for 37 years. If the doctors treating Aruna Shanbaug and the Dean of the KEM Hospital, together acting in the best interest of the patient, feel that life sustaining treatments should continue, their decision should be respected.

Argument in Support of Euthanasia tc " Argument in Support of Euthanasia"

·          Right to dignified death : The right of a competent, terminally ill person to avoid excruciating pain and embrace a timely and dignified death. The exercise of this right is as central to personal autonomy and bodily integrity.

•         Right to get relief from excruciating pain : Right guaranteed in the European Declaration of Human Rights provides the right not to be forced to suffer. It should be considered as much of a crime to make someone live who with justification does not wish to continue as it is to take life without consent.”

•         Health care spending: Given the cost of health care expenditure, the expensive palliative care becomes a huge burden for the family members. That too when the chance of survival is meager.

Argument against Euthanasia tc " Argument against Euthanasia"

•         Right to live does not entail  Right to death: The Supreme court in Gian Kaur case made it all clear that “right to die” with dignity at the end of life is not to be confused or equated with the right to die an unnatural death curtailing the natural span of life.

•         Inhumane and cruel: When the patient is in a terminally ill condition the aforesaid acts or series of acts and/or such omissions will be cruel, inhuman and intolerable (especially when s/he is not in a stable mental state to give correct opinion or will give an emotionally charged opinion .In both the cases it will lead to injustice).

•         Illegal: Withdrawing/withholding of hydration/food/medical support to a patient is unknown to Indian law and is contrary to law.

•         Nature of Human society: Indian society is emotional and care-oriented. These kind of decisions are against Indian culture.

•         Chances of Misuse : Again there was a great danger in permitting euthanasia that the relatives of a person may conspire with doctors and get him killed to inherit his property.

•         Promising medical technology : The chances of a medical cure cannot be ruled out. Over time , medical science has evolved to find cure to so called incurable diseases (even AIDS). Hence even if there is a slightest chance of cure, the person should not be deprived of his/her life.

•         Voluntary and non-voluntary Euthanasia: Voluntary euthanasia is where the consent is taken from the patient, whereas non voluntary euthanasia is where the consent is unavailable e.g. when the patient is in coma, or is otherwise unable to give consent. While there is no legal difficulty in the case of the former, the latter poses several problems.

Through the above judgment, The Supreme court not only showed a middle ground for the long standing debate of “Euthanasia”, but also directed the government to abolish obsolete and inconsistent laws like sec 309 of IPC (which criminalizes and punishes the person attempting suicide). Moreover, ethical questions like right to dignified death and euthanasia are difficult to be wholly addressed by the strict statutes of law. It needs a larger social conscience to arrive at a solution, which will reflect the ethical maturity and sensitivity of the society as a whole.

Constitutional Provisions related to the Supreme Court

  In a modern nation state, judiciary plays an important role of interpreting and applying the law. In a country with within constitution, the judiciary upholds the supremacy of constitutional provisions. In India, within the framework of supremacy of the constitution, parliamentary democracy and a federal set up, the judicial system is unitary in nature and presents a single integrated system of courts for the union and the states which administer both union and state laws. The Indian judiciary is like a pyramid in structure at the top of which is the Supreme Court of India. Below the Supreme Court stand High Courts of different states and below the High Court there is a hierarchy of subordinate courts. These subordinate courts are subordinate to and controlled by the High Courts.

Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court

The scope of powers of Supreme Court to hear and decide cases is called its jurisdiction. The Supreme Court has three types of jurisdictions namely original, appellate and advisory. Let us now examine the three jurisdictions.

Original Jurisdiction

There are certain cases which fall within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. It means that all such cases begin or originate in the Supreme Court, only. It also means that such cases cannot be initiated in any other court. The cases or disputes that come under the original jurisdiction are given below:

(i) (a) Disputes between the Government of India on the one side and one or more States on the other side.

(b) Disputes between the Government of India and one or more States on one side and one or more States on the other side.

(c) Disputes between two or more States.

(ii) The Supreme Court has been invested with special powers in the enforcement of Fundamental Rights. In this connection, it has the power to issue directions or writs.

(iii) Cases under Public Interests Litigation (PIL) can also be heard directly. (This is an extra Constitutional practice; there is no mention of PIL in the Constitution).

Appellate Jurisdiction

The power of a superior/higher court to hear and decide appeals against the judgment of a lower court is called appellate jurisdiction. The Supreme Court has vast appellate jurisdiction. It hears appeals against the judgment of the High Courts. Thus, it is the highest and the final Court of Appeal. If one of the parties to a dispute is not satisfied with the decision of the High Court, one can go to the Supreme Court and file an appeal. The appeals can be filled in Civil, Criminal and Constitutional cases.

Advisory Jurisdiction

This power implies Court’s right to give advice, if sought. Under advisory jurisdiction, the President of India may refer any question of law or public importance to Supreme Court for its advice. But the Supreme Court is not bound to give advice. In case, the advice or the opinion of the Court is sent to the President, he may or may not accept it. The advice of the Court is not binding on the President. So far, whenever the Court has given its advice, the President has always accepted it. The Court refused to give its advice on the question whether a temple existed at the spot, where Babri Masjid was built at Ayodhya.

The Supreme Court is primarily a court of appeal and has extensive appellate jurisdiction. Its primary function is to interpret the Constitution and declare whether or not any legislation or administrative action is unconstitutional. The Supreme Court is the final arbiter in all constitutional controversies. The law declared by the Supreme Court is binding on all courts in India, and is the law of the land.

This power is extremely wide and enables the Supreme Court to act as a check against improper exercise of jurisdiction by judicial or quasi-judicial bodies as well as maintain a uniformity of legal approach.

Supreme Court since independence has given many landmark judgments which have impact on the progress of the nation.

In the other files hereby, discussing the different landmark judgments.

Judgment of the Supreme Court on NOTA

  India is a Socialist, Secular, Democratic Republic and the largest democracy in the World. The modern Indian nation state came into existence on 15th of August 1947. Since then free and fair elections have been held at regular intervals as per the principles enshrined in the Constitution, Electoral Laws and System.

The ‘Fair’ denotes equal opportunity to all people. Universal adult suffrage conferred on the citizens of India by the Constitution has made it possible for these millions of individual voters to go to the polls and thus participate in the governance of our country.

The Constitution of India has vested in the Election Commission of India the superintendence, direction and control of the entire process for conduct of elections to Parliament and Legislature of every State and to the offices of President and Vice-President of India.

But the election at present are not being hold in ideal conditions because of the enormous amount of money required to be spent and large muscle power needed for winning the elections. The major defects which come in the path of electoral system in India are: money power, muscle power, criminalisation of politics, poll violence, booth capturing, communalism, castism, non-serious and independent candidates, etc.

For democracy to survive, it is essential that the best available men should be chosen as people’s representatives for proper governance of the country. This can be best achieved through men of high moral and ethical values, who win the elections on a positive vote. But these days almost all candidates standing in elections are not upto to the expectations of people.

So the Supreme Court, in   PUCL  v.  Union of India , upheld the constitutional right of citizens to cast a negative vote in elections.  

In   PUCL  v.  Union of India , the constitutional validity of Rules 41(2), (3) and 49-O of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961, was impugned. Both sides agreed on the fact that the combined effect of these rules was that persons who did not vote in elections   were recorded  (by the presiding officer) as having not voted.

The petitioners argued that this was a violation of the right to secret balloting, protected by Articles 19(1)(a) and 21 of the Constitution.

The Court then found that in a system of direct elections, secrecy was essential in order to ensure the effectiveness of the vote – that is, elections could not be free and fair unless secrecy was maintained (that much is logical; naturally, the only way of preventing bribery, coercion and post-election reprisals is secrecy).  

Further, since the freedom to vote naturally included the freedom   not   to vote, it would be arbitrary to extend secrecy to one and not the other. The apex court said the right to vote and the right to say NOTA are both part of basic right of voters.

In addition, the act of not voting was as much a   positive  exercise of free expression under Article 19(1)(a) as was voting itself, and so deserved similar levels of protection.

The two main key components that came out of the Supreme Court judgment are:

·          Right to vote also includes a right not to vote i.e. right to reject. Right to reject implies that a voter while voting has every right not to opt for any of the candidates during an election. Such a right implies a choice to remain neutral .This may happen when a voter feels that none of the candidate in a candidacy deserves to be elected. It happens by the way of his choice, belief, thinking and expression. Right to reject has its genus in freedom of speech and expression.

·          Right to secrecy is an integral part of a free and fair election.  It is a central right of an elector to cast his vote without fear of reprisal, duress or coercion as per Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. Protection of elector’s identity and affording secrecy is therefore integral to free and fair elections and an arbitrary distinction between the voter who casts his vote and the voter who does not cast his vote is violative of Article 14, Article 19(1)(a) and Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. Secrecy of the voters is necessary in order to maintain the purity of the electoral system. Every voter has a right to vote in a free and fair manner and not disclose to any person how he has voted in direct elections to Lok Sabha or State Legislatures, maintenance of secrecy is a must and is insisted upon all over the world in democracies where direct elections are involved to ensure that a voter casts his vote without any fear of being victimized if his vote is disclosed.

The judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in this case is significant not only because it introduced the option of NOTA on the EVMs but also because it dignified the right to vote.

By declaring that right to vote is essentially a right to free expression, they brought this right under the purview of fundamental rights. Furthermore, the court also declared that the right to vote included the right not to vote.

Negative features in NOTA:

As per the provisions of clause (a) of Rule 64 of Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961, read with Section 65 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, the candidate who has polled the largest number of valid votes is to be declared elected by the Returning Officer. NOTA do not mean rejection. That may sound self-defeating to the whole point of NOTA but according to Indian democracy the rule of first past the post is declared the winner. Thus, if out of total 10,000 votes, 9999 voters elect NOTA option and just one candidate gets even a single vote , then the latter wins from that constituency.

There has been a debate for re-election to be held in case the total number of NOTA votes crosses a certain percentage. However, this has no legal standing currently and hence NOTA is merely cosmetic in nature.

NOTA can only work only when it is paired with Right To Recall option where voters can recall candidates they have elected. This will instill fear in candidates to do well in office and also lead to giving NOTA importance because it acts as a pre-cursor to public displeasure. Currently, Right To Recall does not exist in the electoral process in the country, which only weakens NOTA.

Recommendations for improving NOTA

According to Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) and National Election Watch (NEW)  following provisions has been recommended with respect to the counting of votes as registered against the NOTA in a particular constituency:-

a)       Votes cast for the ‘none-of-the-above’ option should also be counted.

b)      In case the ‘none-of-the-above’ option gets more votes than any of the candidates, none of the candidates should be declared elected and a fresh election held in which none of the candidates in this election are allowed to contest.

c)       In the following elections, with fresh candidates and with a ‘none-of-the above’ option, only that candidate should be declared elected who gets at least 50 percent + one of the votes cast.

d)      If even in this round, the ‘none-of-the above’ option gets the highest number of votes cast or none of the candidate gets at least 50 percent + one of the votes cast, then the process should be repeated.

This may appear to be a cumbersome and tedious process but it will nudge the entire system in the direction of (a) better representativeness among the elected representatives by reducing the sectarian effects of vote banks, and (b) encouraging political parties to put up better candidates.

Keshavananda Bharti vs. State of Kerala

  According to the Constitution, Parliament and the state legislatures in India have the power to make laws within their respective jurisdictions. This power is not absolute in nature. The Constitution vests in the judiciary, the power to adjudicate upon the constitutional validity of all laws. If a law made by Parliament or the state legislatures violates any provision of the Constitution, the Supreme Court has the power to declare such a law invalid or ultra vires. Whereas the founding fathers wanted the Constitution to be an adaptable document rather than a rigid framework for governance hence the provision of amendments were given in Article 368.

The Keshavananda Bharti case depicts the tussle between Articles 13(2) and 368.

The Kesavananda Bharati case was the culmination of a serious conflict between the judiciary and the government. It is popularly known as fundamental rights case. Under this case Supreme Court of India outlined the Basic Structure doctrine of the Constitution and it can be regarded as a second sitting of 'Constituent Assembly'. The fundamental question dealt in Kesavananda Bharati v State of Kerala is whether the power to amend the constitution is an unlimited, or there is identifiable parameters regarding powers to amend the constitution.

Background tc " Background"

In order to understand the famous case of Kesavananda Bharathi, one must trace through the basics, events and cases which led to the historic decision.

The Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950 which was in contravention of then fundamental Right to Property (Article 31). It was hit by 13(3) as it was infringing Article 31 (Part III, Fundamental Rights). The Act was challenged in High Court which held the act to be unconstitutional for being violative of Article 14 of the Constitution.

Thus in order to protect and validate  zamindari abolition laws, the Government made First Amendment of the Constitution of India which made  several changes to the Fundamental Rights provisions of the constitution. Article 31-A and 31 B was also added. Ninth Schedule was inserted which protects any legislation inserted within the schedule, from judicial review.

Hence the buildup to Kesavananda was marked by a series of cases and decisions that set the stage for the case itself. At the core of all these cases was the basic question: Was Parliament's power to amend the Constitution unlimited, since it represented the will of the people and its majority, or was that power circumscribed when it came to certain fundamental rights of the people?

Series of cases prior to Kesavananda Bharti case are following.

1)    Shankari Prasad vs. Union of India (1951)

The constitutional validity of first amendment (1951), which curtailed the right to property, was challenged. The SC ruled out that the power to amend the Constitution under Article 368 also included the power to amend fundamental rights and that the word "law" in Article 13 (8) includes only an ordinary law made in exercise of the legislative powers and does not include Constitutional amendment which is made in exercise of constituent power. Therefore, a Constitutional amendment will be valid even if it abridges or takes any of the fundamental rights.

2)    Sajjan Singh V. State of Rajasthan (1965)

The validity of the 17th Amendment Act, 1964 (which changed the definition of an "estate" given in article 31A of the Constitution so as to include therein lands held under ryotwari settlement in addition to other lands in respect of which provisions are normally made in land reform enactments. The Amendment also added 44 additional State enactments relating to land reforms to the Ninth Schedule to the Constitution in order to secure their constitutional validity and prevent them from being challenged before the judiciary on the ground that they are inconsistent with any of the provisions of Part III of the Constitution relating to Fundamental Rights. This was challenged on the ground that one of the acts inserted by the amendment in the 9th Schedule affected the petitioner on the basis that the amendment fell within the purview of Article 368.

Supreme Court approved the judgment in Shankari Prasad case and held that on Article 13 (2) the case was rightly decided. Amendment includes amendment to all provisions of the Constitution.

3)    Golaknath V. State of Punjab (1967)

The Hon'ble Supreme Court prospectively overruled its decision in Shankari Prasad and Sajjan Singh cases and held that Parliament had no power to amend Part III of the Constitution so as to abridge or take away any of the Fundamental Rights. It also added that Article 368 merely lays down the procedure for the purpose of amendment. Further, the Court said that an amendment is a law under Article 13(2) of the Constitution of India and if it violates any fundamental right, it may be declared void. Therefore, amendments which "take away or abridge" the Fundamental Rights provisions cannot be passed. Article 368 does not contain a power to amend the constitution but only a procedure.

To nullify the Golaknath verdict, Parliament enacted the 24th Amendment to the Constitution, laying down that its powers to amend the Constitution were unrestricted and unlimited. Finally all the issues related to it was challenged in Keshavanand Case.

The Kesavananda case (1973) tc " The Kesavananda case (1973) "

Under this Supreme Court declared 31 C as unconstitutional and invalid on the ground that judicial review is basic structure and hence cannot be taken away.

The Supreme Court reviewed the decision in Golaknath v. State of Punjab, and considered the validity of the 24th, 25th, 26th and 29th amendments.

Thus, the Supreme Court laid down the Basic Structure Doctrine in this case.

Basic structure includes:

Ambiguity of the Judgment tc " Ambiguity of the Judgement"

Kesavananda Bharati actually left an ambigious historical legacy.

•         It said that Parliament could not interfere with the basic structure of the Constitution, but left open the question of what constituted "basic structure". As to what are these basic features, the debate still continues.

•         The judgment also refused to consider the right to property as a fundamental right that was covered by the 'basic structure' doctrine. Despite that, the right to private property, is more solid today, and yet not absolute, as it should be in a market economy.

•         This judgment ruled that Article 368 does not enable Parliament in its constituent capacity to delegate its function of amending the Constitution to another legislature or to itself in its ordinary legislative capacity.

•         The basic structure doctrine applies only to the constitutionality of amendments and not to ordinary Acts of Parliament, which must conform to the entirety of the Constitution and not just to its basic structure.

Significance tc " Significance "

•         The most significant contribution by Kesavananda Bharati judgment is the recognition of supremacy of the Constitution of India and its unalterable features.

•         The Kesavananda judgment also defined the extent to which Parliament could restrict property rights, in pursuit of land reform and the redistribution of large landholdings to cultivators, overruling previous decisions that suggested that the right to property could not be restricted.

Conclusion tc " Conclusion "

This case upheld the changes in 24th amendment in Article 368 and Article 13 of Indian Constitution by overruling Golaknath Judgment. It determined the fabric of Indian constitution which is still relevant and serving as Fundamental Rights case. 

Shah Bano Judgment and Uniform Civil Code in India

  India is a religiously diverse country with all the major religions of the world finding place in this land. At the same time it has also faced the scar of partition which many believe was because of anxieties and apprehensions of a particular religious community. Keeping these issues in mind the framers of Indian Constitution provided right to equality, freedom of religion and later in 1976 through 42nd Amendment Act India was declared a secular, democratic, republic.

Our constitutional forefathers were also aware of the fact in spite of so much diversity in the country there is a need to build social cohesion in the Indian society, need to ensure that progressive ideas are not thwarted on the altar of freedom of religion.

Therefore right to equality, freedom of religion and the reasonable restriction, secularism and Uniform Civil Code concepts were provided for progressive, egalitarian and equal society where state would be empowered to determine the relationship between human beings and the relationship of human with God is left on the discretion of the individual.

The issue of Uniform Civil Code came up in Shah Bano case.

About the Shah Bano case tc " About the Shah Bano case"

The Shah Bano case of 1985 was a test case of all the above principles. In this case Shah Bano, a Muslim women and wife of Mohammad Ahmad Khan filed a petition at a local court in Indore, against her husband under section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, asking him for a maintenance amount for herself and her children.

Husband gave an irrevocable talaq (divorce) to her which was his prerogative under Islamic law and took up the defence that since Shah Bano had ceased to be his wife and therefore he was under no obligation to provide maintenance for her as except prescribed under the Islamic law which was in total Rs. 5400. The issue was finally taken up by Supreme Court and it decided it in favour of Shah Bano using secular Criminal Procedure Code regardless of religion.

Shah Bano case was landmark case for many reasons:

•      It showed the aspirational and progressive character of Muslim women and other sections of Muslim society, who were ready to challenge the religious orthodoxy.

•      It brought into focus the plight of the Muslim women, the discrimination they has to face in matters related to marriage.

•      It showed that the laws of the land which are secular in character will take precedence over the religiously ordained customs and personal laws.

•      It was triumph of the principle of social justice.

•      It was a step in the direction of implementation of UCC and

•      Most important of all it raised a debate about the rights of women, application of principle of equality. The debate engulfed civil society, religious groups, legislature and common man and nothing can be more fruitful in a democracy than a debate.

In 1986, the Parliament of India passed an act titled The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986, that nullified the Supreme Court's judgment in the Shah Bano judgment. Diluting the Supreme Court judgment, the act allowed maintenance to a divorced woman only during the period of iddat, or till 90 days after the divorce, according to the provisions of Islamic law. When the judgment was overturned by Parliament it showed:

•      That political populism still dominates over rational principles based on equality, human rights and social justice. It showed that it was not only the sentiments of religious minorities but the absence of political will also that prevents the implementation of UCC.

•      The judgment has left a bitter legacy, which prevents further reforms on UCC because of fear of political backlash.

Conflict between secularism, UCC and freedom of religion tc " Conflict between secularism, UCC and freedom of religion"

The case brought into focus issue of conflict between secularism, UCC and freedom of religion. During the proceedings of case the Islamic groups sighted the judgment as an instance of attack on their religious freedom and their right to their own personal religious laws. Secularism as a principle with western interpretation -'non-interference by the state in religious matters' - was used to mobilize support against the judgment.

It raised the question whether secularism, freedom of religion are in conflict with UCC?

When the Preamble of Indian Constitution declares India a 'secular' state it means that state is only concerned with the relation of man with fellow man, man with state and not of man with God. He is free to choose his own God, practice the principles of the religion. The Indian doctrine of secularism does not mean absolute non-interference but principled distance from the religion. Thus implementation of Article 44 is under the provision of secularism.

Article 44 is based on the concept that there is no necessary connection between religion and personal law in a civilised society. Marriage, succession and like matters are of secular nature and, therefore, law can regulate them.

The whole debate can be summed up by the judgment given by Justice R.M. Sahai. He said,

"Ours is a secular democratic republic. Freedom of religion is the core of our culture. Even the slightest of deviation shakes the social fibre. But religious practices, violative of human rights and dignity and sacerdotal suffocation of essentially civil and material freedoms are not autonomy but oppression. Therefore, a unified code is imperative, both, for protection of the oppressed and for promotion of national unity and solidarity."

Importance of Uniform civil Code tc " Importance of Uniform civil Code"

·          Uniform Civil Code will in the long run ensure Equality. Also, UCC will help to promote Gender equality.

·          It will lead to national integration and draw minorities into the mainstream.

·          It will encourage communal harmony.

In order to promote the spirit of uniformity of laws and accomplish the objectives enshrined in Art.44 of the Constitution, the following suggestions need immediate consideration:

·          A progressive and broadminded outlook is needed among the people to understand the spirit of such code. For this, education, awareness and sensitization programmes must be taken up.

·          The Uniform Civil Code should act in the best interest of all the religions.

·          A committee of eminent jurists should be considered to maintain uniformity and care must be taken not to hurt the sentiments of any particular community.

Related Articles

Verifying, please be patient.

Our Centers

DELHI (Karol Bagh)

GS SCORE, 1B, Second Floor, Pusa Road, Karol Bagh, New Delhi - 110005 (Beside Karol Bagh Metro Station Gate No. 8)

Get directions on Google Maps

BHUBANESWAR (Jaydev Vihar)

GS SCORE, Plot No.2298, Jaydev Vihar Square, Near HCG Day Care, BBSR - 751013

LUCKNOW (Aliganj)

GS SCORE, 2nd Floor, B-33, Sangam Chauraha, Sector H, Aliganj, Lucknow, UP - 226024

© 2024 IAS SCORE. All Rights Reserved

Welcome to our secure login portal. Access your account with ease.

• Using Password

Not registered yet? register here!

Welcome to our secure register portal. For a brighter future, register now and unlock endless learning opportunities.

User Register

Already have an account? Login

Oops, forgot your password? Don't worry, we've got you covered. Reset it here

Lost your login details? No problem! forgot your password in just a few clicks

Forgot Password

Verify your mobile number, you have successfully logged in.

Join Us on WhatsApp

Win up to 100% Scholarship

• UPSC Online
• UPSC offline and Hybrid
• UPSC Optional Coaching
• UPPCS Online
• BPSC Online
• MPSC Online
• MPPSC Online
• WBPSC Online
• OPSC Online
• UPPCS Offline Coaching
• BPSC Offline Coaching
• UPSC Test Series
• State PSC Test Series
• DAILY CURRENT AFFAIRS
• SUBJECT WISE CURRENT AFFAIRS
• DAILY EDITORIAL ANALYSIS
• DAILY CURRENT AFFAIRS QUIZ
• Daily Prelims(MCQs) Practice
• Daily Mains Answer Writing
• Free Resources

• Offline Centers
• NCERT Notes
• UDAAN Notes
• UPSC Syllabus
• UPSC Prelims PYQs
• UPSC Mains PYQs
• Prelims Preparation

Euthanasia In India: Definition, Types, and Legal Aspects

Recently, a 28-year-old Dutch woman legally ended her life due to her struggle with crippling depression, autism and personality disorder.

French President Presents a Bill on Assisted Dying

• In January 2024, the French President presented a Bill on assisted dying to legalize euthanasia for the terminally ill.
• Living wills implementation lags in India even after the six years of the Supreme Court declaring that Indians have the right to die with dignity.

About Euthanasia

• Refers: The practice under which an individual intentionally ends his/her life to get relief from an incurable condition, or intolerable suffering.
• Active euthanasia: It involves an active intervention to end a person’s life with substances or external force, such as administering a lethal injection.                                                  
• Passive euthanasia: It refers to withdrawing life support or treatment that is essential to keep a terminally ill person alive.
• Voluntary euthanasia: It takes place with the consent of the patient. 
• Involuntary euthanasia: It is administered without the patient’s consent.  

Euthanasia In India

• Aruna Ramchandra Shanbaug v. Union of India (2011) : In this case, the Supreme Court had held that passive euthanasia can be allowed under exceptional circumstances.
• Living Will: A living will is a legal document that specifies the type of medical care that an individual does or does not want in the event they are unable to communicate their wishes.
• It is also known as an advance directive.
• In 2023 the Supreme Court modified the guidelines to make the right to die with dignity more accessible.

Global Trends

• Netherlands, Luxembourg, Belgium: These Countries allow both euthanasia and assisted suicide for anyone who faces “unbearable suffering” that has no chance of improvement.
• Switzerland:  Switzerland has banned euthanasia but allows assisted dying in the presence of a doctor or physician.
• Canada:  Canada had announced that euthanasia and assisted dying would be allowed for mentally ill patients by March 2023; however, the decision has been widely criticized, and the move may be delayed.
• United States: USA has different laws in different states. Euthanasia is allowed in some states like Washington, Oregon, and Montana.
• United Kingdom: The United Kingdom considers it illegal and equivalent to manslaughter.

To get PDF version, Please click on "Print PDF" button.

• Recent Post
• Related Post
• Most Viewed Post

The Challenge of Extrapulmonary Tuberculosis (EPTB)

Geomagnetic Storms

Leopard Cat

UNESCO’s Memory of the World Asia-Pacific Regional Reg...

Global alliance of national human rights institutions (ganhr..., social stock exchange, prime- minister’s egypt state visit, shanan power project, msp hike and its impact, natural rubber production in india: status, government initi..., latest comments, recent editorial.

Shifting Dynamics in West Asia: US Foreign Policy,...

FICCI’s Report on Illicit Trade in India

Spam Calls, Policy Initiatives, Regulatory Challen...

Suicides and Entrance Examinations, Prioritizing M...

India Must Avoid Confrontation with Five Eyes Inte...

Chief Justice’s Call for Transformation unde...

Popular current affairs

The Challenge of Extrapulmonary Tuberculosis (EPTB...

UNESCO’s Memory of the World Asia-Pacific Re...

Global Alliance of National Human Rights Instituti...

Our Courses

THE MOST LEARNING PLATFORM

Learn From India's Best Faculty

Our Initiatives

Beginner’s roadmap, quick links.

PW-Only IAS came together specifically to carry their individual visions in a mission mode. Infusing affordability with quality and building a team where maximum members represent their experiences of Mains and Interview Stage and hence, their reliability to better understand and solve student issues.

Subscribe our Newsletter

Sign up now for our exclusive newsletter and be the first to know about our latest Initiatives, Quality Content, and much more.

Contact Details

G-Floor,4-B Pusha Road, New Delhi, 110060

• +91 9920613613
• [email protected]

Download Our App

Biginner's roadmap, suscribe now form, fill the required details to get early access of quality content..

Join Us Now

(Promise! We Will Not Spam You.)

CURRENT AF.

<div class="new-fform">

Select centre Online Mode Hybrid Mode PWonlyIAS Delhi (ORN) PWonlyIAS Delhi (MN) PWonlyIAS Lucknow PWonlyIAS Patna Other

Select course UPSC Online PSC ONline UPSC + PSC ONLINE UPSC Offline PSC Offline UPSC+PSC Offline UPSC Hybrid PSC Hybrid UPSC+PSC Hybrid Other

</div>

• भाषा : हिंदी
• Classroom Courses
• Our Selections
• Student Login
• About NEXT IAS
• Director’s Desk
• Advisory Panel
• Faculty Panel
• General Studies Courses
• Optional Courses
• Interview Guidance Program
• Postal Courses
• Test Series
• Current Affairs
• Student Portal

• Recently, Honourable Supreme Court agreed to ease the procedure for passive euthanasia in the country
• A five-judge Constitution bench headed by Justice KM Joseph agrees to significantly ease the procedure for passive euthanasia in the country.
• As per new guidelines, the document will now be signed by the executor of the “living will” in the presence of two attesting witnesses , preferably independent, and attested before a notary or Gazetted Officer.

• Previously in 2018, the SC had in its judgment recognized that a terminally ill patient or a person in a persistent vegetative state may execute an advance medical directive or a “living will” to refuse medical treatment, holding the right to live with dignity also included “smoothening” the process of dying.
• The Supreme Court has simplified this process for passive euthanasia by modifying its earlier order and removing the condition that mandated a magistrate’s approval for the withdrawal or withholding of life support to a terminally ill.
• The judgment of the top court had come on a PIL filed by NGO Common Cause seeking recognition of the “living will ” made by terminally-ill patients for passive euthanasia.
• The SC has also affirmed that the directives and guidelines shall remain in force till Parliament brings legislation in the field.
• Previously, the Law Commission of India in its 196th Report in 2006 had said that active   euthanasia should be decriminalized, but not legalized.

What is Euthanasia?

• Euthanasia is the act of deliberately ending a person’s life to eliminate pain or suffering
• Ethicists differentiate between active and passive euthanasia.

Other types:

• Voluntary Euthanasia : It is done when the patient themselves requests to end their life, while non-voluntary euthanasia is when the decision to end the patient’s life is made by someone else, such as a family member or legal guardian. This type of euthanasia is illegal in most countries, including India.
• Involuntary euthanasia : It is when the patient is killed against their will, and is illegal in all countries.

Significance

• End of Pain: Euthanasia provides a way to relieve the intolerably extreme pain and suffering of an individual. It relieves the terminally ill people from a lingering death.
• Respecting Person’s Choice: The essence of human life is to live a dignified life and to force the person to live in an undignified way is against the person’s choice. Thus, it expresses the choice of a person which is a fundamental principle.
• Treatment for others: In many developing and underdeveloped countries like India, there is a lack of funds. There is a shortage of hospital space. So, the energy of doctors and hospital beds can be used for those people whose life can be saved instead of continuing the life of those who want to die. 
• Dignified Death: Article 21 of the Indian Constitution clearly provides for living with dignity. A person has a right to live a life with at least minimum dignity and if that standard is falling below that minimum level then a person should be given a right to end his life. 
• Addressing Mental Agony: The motive behind this is to help rather than harm. It not only relieves the unbearable pain of a patient but also relieves the relatives of a patient from the mental agony.
• Medical Ethics: Medical ethics call for nursing, caregiving and healing and not ending the life of the patient. In the present time, medical science is advancing at a great pace making even the most incurable diseases curable today. Thus, instead of encouraging a patient to end his life, the medical practitioners have to encourage the patients to lead their painful life with strength. 
• Moral Wrong: Taking a life is morally and ethically wrong. The value of life can never be undermined.
• Vulnerable people will become more prone to it: Groups that represent disabled people are against the legalisation of euthanasia on the ground that such groups of vulnerable people would feel obliged to opt for euthanasia as they may see themselves as a burden to society.
• Suicide v/s Euthanasia:   When suicide is not allowed then euthanasia should also not be allowed. A person commits suicide when he goes into a state of depression and has no hope from the life. Similar is the situation when a person asks for euthanasia. But such a tendency can be lessened by proper care of such patients and showing hope in them. 

RELATED ARTICLES MORE FROM AUTHOR

Daily current affairs 15-05-2024, daily current affairs 14-05-2024, daily current affairs 13-05-2024, india-nepal ties in changing times.

Complex issue of Assisted Suicide

Prelims level: Assisted Suicide

Mains level: Assisted Suicide and issues involved

A renowned French filmmaker died earlier this week by assisted suicide at the age of 91.

What is Assisted Suicide?

• Assisted suicide and euthanasia are practices under which a person intentionally ends their life with active assistance from others.
• These have long been contentious topics of debate as they involve a complex set of moral, ethical and in some cases, religious questions.
• Several European nations, some states in Australia and Colombia in South America allow assisted suicide and euthanasia under certain circumstances.

Difference between assisted suicide and euthanasia

• Euthanasia is the act of intentionally ending a life to relieve suffering – for example a lethal injection administered by a doctor.
• Intentionally helping another person to kill themselves is known as assisted suicide.
• This can include providing someone with strong sedatives with which to end their life or buying them a ticket to Switzerland (where assisted suicide is legal) to end their life
• Euthanasia can further be divided into active and passive.
• The practice of passive euthanasia involves simply stopping lifesaving treatment or medical intervention with the consent of the patient or a family member or a close friend representing the patient.
• Active euthanasia, which is legal in only a few countries, entails the use of substances to end the life of the patient.

India and Assisted suicide/ Euthanasia

• In a landmark judgment, the Supreme Court of India legalised passive euthanasia in 2018 , stating that it was a matter of ‘living will’.
• According to the judgment, an adult in his conscious mind is permitted to refuse medical treatment or voluntarily decide not to take medical treatment to embrace death in a natural way, under certain conditions.

Consideration for ‘living will’

• In the 538-page judgment, the court laid down a set of guidelines for ‘living will’ and defined passive euthanasia and euthanasia as well.
• It also laid down guidelines for ‘living will’ made by terminally ill patients who beforehand know about their chances of slipping into a permanent vegetative state.
• The court specifically stated that the rights of a patient, in such cases, w ould not fall out of the purview of Article 21 (right to life and liberty) of the Indian Constitution.
• The SC’s judgment was in accordance with its verdict in March 2011 on a separate plea.
• While ruling on a petition on behalf of Aruna Shanbaug Case , the court had allowed passive euthanasia for the nurse who had spent decades in a vegetative state.

Who was Aruna Shanbaug?

• Shanbaug had become central to debates on the legality of right to die and euthanasia in India.
• Shanbaug died of pneumonia in March 2015 at the age of 66, 42 years of which she had spent in a room at KEM Hospital in Mumbai, after a brutal rape left her in a permanent vegetative state.

Recent cases in India

• In 2018, an old couple from Mumbai wrote to then President Kovind, seeking permission for active euthanasia or assisted suicide.
• Neither of them suffered from a life-threatening ailment.
• The couple stated in their plea that they had lived a happy life and didn’t want to depend on hospitals for old age ailments.
• Euthanasia can save  life  of  many  other  people  by  donation  of  vital organs.

Issues with such killings

• Euthanasia can be misused. Many psychiatrists are of the opinion that a terminally ill person or someone who is old and suffering from an incurable disease is often not in the right frame of mind to take a call.
• Family members deciding on behalf of the patient can also lead to abuse of the law legalizing euthanasia as it can be due to some personal interest.

UPSC 2023 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

JOIN THE COMMUNITY

Join us across social media platforms., your better version awaits you.

• UPSC IAS Exam Pattern
• UPSC IAS Prelims
• UPSC IAS Mains
• UPSC IAS Interview
• UPSC IAS Optionals
• UPSC Notification
• UPSC Eligibility Criteria
• UPSC Online
• UPSC Admit Card
• UPSC Results
• UPSC Cut-Off
• UPSC Calendar
• Documents Required for UPSC IAS Exam
• UPSC IAS Prelims Syllabus
• General Studies 1
• General Studies 2
• General Studies 3
• General Studies 4
• UPSC IAS Interview Syllabus
• UPSC IAS Optional Syllabus

Euthanasia and Living Will – UPSC Social Justice Notes

Euthanasia, often referred to as mercy killing, is a topic that sparks profound ethical, moral, and legal debates worldwide. It involves the deliberate ending

Our website uses cookies to improve your experience. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies Got it

Keep me signed in until I sign out

Forgot your password?

A new password will be emailed to you.

Have received a new password? Login here

• TRP for UPSC Personality Test
• Interview Mentorship Programme – 2023
• Daily News & Analysis
• Daily Current Affairs Quiz
• Baba’s Explainer
• Dedicated TLP Portal
• 60 Day – Rapid Revision (RaRe) Series – 2024
• English Magazines
• Hindi Magazines
• Yojana & Kurukshetra Gist
• PT20 – Prelims Test Series
• Gurukul Foundation
• Gurukul Advanced – Launching Soon
• Prelims Exclusive Programme (PEP)
• Prelims Test Series (AIPTS)
• Integrated Learning Program (ILP) – 2025
• Connect to Conquer(C2C) 2024
• TLP Plus – 2024
• TLP Connect – 2024
• Public Administration FC – 2024
• Anthropology Foundation Course
• Anthropology Optional Test Series
• Sociology Foundation Course – 2024
• Sociology Test Series – 2023
• Geography Optional Foundation Course
• Geography Optional Test Series – Coming Soon!
• PSIR Foundation Course
• PSIR Test Series – Coming Soon
• ‘Mission ಸಂಕಲ್ಪ’ – Prelims Crash Course
• CTI (COMMERCIAL TAX INSPECTOR) Test Series & Video Classes
• Monthly Magazine
• August 13, 2022

Ethics , Governance

In News: A 49-year-old woman from Bengaluru wants the court to stop her friend, a Noida-based 48-year-old man with a debilitating health condition, from travelling to Europe allegedly to undergo assisted suicide or euthanasia — an option not available in India to a person who is not terminally ill.

• The man has been suffering from Chronic Fatigue Syndrome since 2014 and is allegedly planning to travel to Switzerland for a physician-assisted suicide.
• In 2018, the Supreme Court had delivered a landmark ruling in Aruna Shanbaug case that made passive euthanasia legal for terminally ill individuals , allowing them to decline the use of life support measures, and letting families of those in incurable coma to withdraw such measures.
• While Section 309 of IPC criminalises attempted suicide , the Mental Healthcare Act Section 115(1) states that “any person who attempts to commit suicide shall be presumed, unless proved otherwise, to have severe stress and shall not be tried and punished under the said Code.”
• Many countries like Switzerland, Singapore, have come under criticism for promoting “suicide tourism” .
• The term Euthanasia comes from two Ancient Greek words ‘Eu’ means ‘Good’, and ‘thantos’ means ‘death’ , so Euthanasia means good death.
• Mercy Killing also known as Euthanasia is an act of providing painless death to a suffering individual who wouldn’t survive if medical facilities are removed from their help.
• Two types: Euthanasia can be also divided into two types according to means of death.
• Active Euthanasia: It is also known as ‘Positive Euthanasia’ or ‘Aggressive Euthanasia’ .
• It refers to causing intentional death of a human being by direct intervention .
• Active euthanasia is usually a quicker means of causing death and all forms of active euthanasia are illegal.
• For example, by giving lethal doses of a drug or by giving a lethal injection .
• Passive Euthanasia: It is also known as ‘Negative Euthanasia’ or ‘Non-Aggressive Euthanasia’ .
• It is intentionally causing death by not providing essential, necessary and ordinary care or food and water.
• It implies discontinuing, withdrawing or removing artificial life support systems.
• Passive euthanasia is usually slower and more uncomfortable than active.

Indian Scenario

• As of now, only passive Euthanasia is allowed in India by the Supreme Court .

Medical Ethics:

• Medical ethics call for nursing, caregiving and healing and not ending the life of the patient.
• In the present time, medical science is advancing at a great pace making even the most incurable diseases curable today.
• Thus, instead of encouraging a patient to end his life, the medical practitioners have to encourage the patients to lead their painful life with strength.

Moral Wrong:

• Taking a life is morally and ethically wrong . The value of life can never be undermined.

Vulnerable will become more prone to it:

• Groups that represent disabled people are against the legalisation of euthanasia on the ground that such groups of vulnerable people would feel obliged to opt for euthanasia as they may see themselves as a burden to society.

Suicide v/s Euthanasia:

• When suicide is not allowed then euthanasia should also not be allowed.
• A person commits suicide when he goes into a state of depression and has no hope from the life.
• Similar is the situation when a person asks for euthanasia.
• But such a tendency can be lessened by proper care of such patients and showing hope in them.

Significance

End of Pain:

• Euthanasia provides a way to relieve the intolerably extreme pain and suffering of an individual.
• It relieves the terminally ill people from a lingering death.

Respecting Person’s Choice:

• The essence of human life is to live a dignified life and to force the person to live in an undignified way is against the person’s choice.
• Thus, it expresses the choice of a person which is a fundamental principle.

Treatment for others:

• In many developing and underdeveloped countries like India, there is a lack of funds. There is a shortage of hospital space.
• So, the energy of doctors and hospital beds can be used for those people whose life can be saved instead of continuing the life of those who want to die.

Dignified Death:

• Article 21 of the Indian Constitution clearly provides for living with dignity .
• A person has a right to live a life with at least minimum dignity and if that standard is falling below that minimum level then a person should be given a right to end his life.

Addressing Mental Agony:

• The motive behind this is to help rather than harm. It not only relieves the unbearable pain of a patient but also relieves the relatives of a patient from the mental agony .

 Way Forward

• Palliative care – Control over the manner and timing of a person’s death has not been and should not be a goal of medicine.
• India needs improved access to high-quality healthcare for the terminally ill so that they go in peace, whenever they do.
• This is referred to as palliative care right from the time an illness is diagnosed till the end of life.
• Moral Support from family and friends makes the patient confident to fight the illness.
• Passage of Medical Treatment of Terminally-ill Patients Bill, 2016 to regulate passive euthanasia.

Source: Indian Express

For a dedicated peer group, Motivation & Quick updates, Join our official telegram channel – https://t.me/IASbabaOfficialAccount

Subscribe to our YouTube Channel HERE to watch Explainer Videos, Strategy Sessions, Toppers Talks & many more…

Related Posts :

Dip in adoption, creative guidance – who am i – inspirational educative articles.

• DAILY CURRENT AFFAIRS IAS | UPSC Prelims and Mains Exam – 15th May 2024
• UPSC Quiz – 2024 : IASbaba’s Daily Current Affairs Quiz 15th May 2024
• [MOCK TEST] Sameeksha 2024 – IASbaba’s All India Mock Test for UPSC Prelims 2024 on 19th May (SUNDAY). Available in Offline & Online Mode (English & हिन्दी)
• DAILY CURRENT AFFAIRS IAS | UPSC Prelims and Mains Exam –14th May 2024
• UPSC Quiz – 2024 : IASbaba’s Daily Current Affairs Quiz 14th May 2024
• DAILY CURRENT AFFAIRS IAS | UPSC Prelims and Mains Exam –13th May 2024
• UPSC Quiz – 2024 : IASbaba’s Daily Current Affairs Quiz 13th May 2024
• [DAY 60] 60 DAY RAPID REVISION (RaRe) SERIES for UPSC Prelims 2024 – ENVIRONMENT, CURRENT AFFAIRS & CSAT TEST SERIES!
• DAILY CURRENT AFFAIRS IAS | UPSC Prelims and Mains Exam –11th May 2024
• UPSC Quiz – 2024 : IASbaba’s Daily Current Affairs Quiz 11th May 2024

Don’t lose out on any important Post and Update. Learn everyday with Experts!!

Email Address

Search now.....

Sign up to receive regular updates.

Sign Up Now !

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

How to Know When a Good Dog Has Gone Bad

Gov. Kristi Noem suggested that President Biden should have euthanized the family dog, as she did. Animal experts said that such an option should be a last resort.

By Emily Anthes

Since late last month, Gov. Kristi Noem of South Dakota has been the subject of fierce bipartisan attacks for her decision to shoot and kill her family dog, a 14-month-old German wirehaired pointer named Cricket. Ms. Noem has repeatedly defended her actions, which are detailed in her forthcoming memoir, in which she says the dog was “aggressive,” “untrainable” and “dangerous to anyone she came in contact with.”

On Sunday, she suggested that President Biden should have considered killing his own dog, Commander, a German shepherd who was banished from the White House last year after repeatedly biting Secret Service officers.

“Joe Biden’s dog has attacked 24 Secret Service people,” Ms. Noem, a Republican, said in an interview on CBS’s “Face the Nation.” “So how many people is enough people to be attacked and dangerously hurt before you make a decision on a dog?”

Experts said that there were some circumstances in which dogs are so aggressive that they should be euthanized. But euthanasia should be an option of last resort, they said, used only when a dog poses a serious danger and other potential solutions have been ruled out. In the cases of both Cricket and Commander, there were plenty of reasonable, nonlethal approaches available.

“We have lots of tools in our tool belt — medication, lots of different behavioral interventions as well — before you get to the step where you’re, like, I can’t handle this dog,” said Erica Feuerbacher, an expert on dog behavior and learning at Virginia Tech. “That’s what I’d want, is that they’d really value their dog’s life and give their dog its best chance of having a full, long life.”

The Guardian first reported on the excerpts from Ms. Noem’s memoir, which is set to be released on Tuesday. In it, she reportedly blames Cricket for ruining a pheasant hunt, killing another family’s chickens and biting, or trying to bite, her.

Although it may be undesirable to people, some level of aggression — growling, baring teeth and even biting — is normal in dogs, which are descended from gray wolves and share some of their predatory drive, said Clive Wynne, a canine-behavior expert at Arizona State University who is working on a book about the history of dogs.

That predatory instinct, Dr. Wynne said, most likely explains why Cricket went after the chickens. But a dog that kills chickens does not necessarily pose a risk to people, he said. “That doesn’t really have any predictive value as a way of gauging whether that dog would then be harmful to you,” he said. “Because you don’t look like prey, you don’t sound like prey, and dogs form these strong emotional bonds with members of their human family.”

More often, Dr. Wynne said, dogs bite humans because they are stressed or scared. “Mostly in a human household, a dog is biting because its other attempts to communicate that it is uncomfortable or fearful have failed,” he said.

Still, even a dog that bites defensively can pose dangers and should receive a professional evaluation from a veterinarian, experts said. Dogs that are sick or in pain might be more likely to lash out; in a 2021 study of nearly 1,000 dogs exhibiting aggressive behavior, researchers found that 15 percent had an underlying medical condition that might have contributed to the misbehavior.

“We’re so quick to say that our dog is aggressive instead of taking a step back and saying, Why is my dog responding this way?” said Vivian Zottola, an author of the study who is a canine behavioral modification specialist in Boston. (She is also a research associate at the Center for Canine Behavior Studies, a nonprofit organization.)

Dogs who receive a clean bill of health may benefit from working with a certified animal behaviorist or a dog trainer. These professionals can also help owners identify whether there are particular triggers that set off their dogs. “We will often overlook our dogs’ stress, and they can be very subtle with stress signals,” Ms. Zottola said.

Often, owners can eliminate aggressive behaviors simply by being attentive to these triggers and by keeping their dogs out of situations that are likely to prompt aggression — what Dr. Feuerbacher described as “just making good decisions on behalf of your dog.”

Dogs that seem nervous or reactive around strangers, for instance, are not good candidates to go to a farmers’ market — and may also be ill-suited to live in the White House. “Clearly, that was not the right environment if the dog is biting multiple times,” Ms. Zottola said.

In cases in which stressors cannot be eliminated from the home environment, a new home might need to be found for the dog.

Medications, including anti-anxiety drugs, can also help soothe some canines.

If all else fails, there are circumstances in which an owner may consider what experts call behavioral euthanasia. In such cases, the dog’s aggression is so unpredictable that it cannot be managed or its bite is so strong that it does severe physical damage, Dr. Feuerbacher said.

In some of those cases, euthanasia might also be in the dog’s best interest; an animal that is lashing out so frequently that it cannot safely be around people probably does not have a great quality of life, she said.

But based on the information made public, Ms. Noem still had several options worth pursuing before resorting to euthanasia, Dr. Feuerbacher said. “I think she missed a few steps,” she said.

Dr. Wynne agreed. “This case is just so egregious,” he said.

Dr. Wynne said that he had been heartened that so many people, on both sides of the political aisle, seemed dismayed by Cricket’s fate. (Mitt Romney took flak during his presidential campaigns for his decision, in 1983, to travel with his family dog, Seamus, strapped to the top of his car in a carrier.)

Even President Trump, who infamously boasted that he could shoot somebody on Fifth Avenue without losing voters, seems to know better than to brag about killing a dog, Dr. Wynne said: “Trump never said, ‘I could shoot a puppy dead on Fifth Avenue.’”

Emily Anthes is a science reporter, writing primarily about animal health and science. She also covered the coronavirus pandemic. More about Emily Anthes