Euthanasia\Mercy killing\Assisted Suicide is one of the most controversial concepts where it's difficult to put your vote on one side and to criticize the other.What I fail to understand is that if suicides or suicidal attempts are not criminalized in any jurisdiction worldwide, then why are we trying to avoid legalizing euthanasia.Having said that, i can imagine how difficult it would be to ensure complete control over this right. There would be cases where you would suspect foul play, but we cannot deny how important is this to look into the need to legalize euthanasia.
There was a time when committing suicide or suicidal acts was a crime.The only reason it was removed was that if there is a survivor, punishing him would only kill any hopes of coming back to normal life.So if suicide is not a crime, why is making someones suicide peaceful and painless, a crime in almost all states of the world except for Netherlands, Belgium, Washington, Montana and few more.
Then again there are many challenges to legalize it.Many other questions with unclear answers. Should it be only for people having terminal illness? Or for poor and helpless too?What about traumatized people with mental illness? Should we consider children euthanasia as well? Can we have a control over the process, especially in India, where the quotidian word count for 'Corruption' is increasing exponentially? And many more. But then how would we find answers to all these if we don't talk about it or discuss it.
I am sure many of us would see it as a cowardly act to escape the pain.The easiest way out of this hell-hole.But have you ever seen anyone who is/was terminally ill.Have you seen the daily routine of someone suffering from cancer or someone who is paraplegic.Have you met a person having excruciating pains for which there is no remedy.I bet we can't even imagine living a minute of their lives.There have been requests from a mother to kill her suffering infant, from a father his daughter,from a man for his women. They all do not seek relief for themselves.They just cannot see their loved ones in pain.They just cannot.
So if a person who has given up from the unbearable pain and the fact that this misery is going to be his life forever, requests for euthanasia, why should the government have to right to stop him? Isn't this his call to make? Isn't this his life ? Or is this his parents life who gave birth to him ? Or is this his wife's life who just wants him to live so that she can have her red hair-line for some more time ? Whose life is it anyway?
11 comments:
Hey Swapnil.
Very nicely put, whose life is it anyway. Self righteous suicide should be an individual's prerogative. Think about it this way, the amount of resource wasted just in keeping someone alive, clinging on those ventilators and IV syringes. Life as a primordial deal was not supposed to be painful. Nature eliminated those who needed to be eliminated. But we learned to beat the grim reaper. Techniques and pathways to prolong life. But certainly a painful life: onerous and burdensome serves no purpose.
Death is not the end, but completion of the journey. The loved ones lost, actually lost is a misnomer used for a lack of a better word, they always remain, we just need to look for clues...and we find them right there.
Hi Swapnil..
Good one.. Hope you know what you want now.. :)
All the best..
Hmm...i agree..mercy killin is another case of freedom of choice..it provides a way 2 relieve extreme pain..!! either govt shud legalize mercy killin or shud undertake medical tr8mnt cost of d suffering soul..
btw...awesome post dear!!!!
@vabz
Nice addition :) Thanks !
@Devi :)
@Ankita
The possibility of the government taking up the cost of treatment of terminal ill patients is 0.Ergo, we have to go with former alternative.
Thanks for sharing :)
I think i hv already expressed my views through my blog in Hindi.Any way I like the way you wrote. If abortion is morally and ethically right then why so much hue and cry on mercy killing.
yeah....it's 'his' life neways....nd only 'he' gets to decide..
@ Atoba I guess the views are the same ...just the words and language differs :)
@kandy
Thanks for sharing your view :)
Hey Swap,
It is such a topic where no one can stand up and say Yes it is right or No, it's absolutely wrong.
I find myself standing on the cross roads while trying to decide whether it is unethical to forcefully take away any life (including our own).
I think the law should have clause to take a before hand permission and only after experts permit it , consent of the relatives should be taken and then such a case should be dealt with
@Sid da
One of the major reasons why the authorities defer to talk on this is that a proper process is difficult to be put in place. But instead of admitting this, they deny the peditions on moral grounds.
What is surprising is that we still give death sentences in India.
Just one thought though, about the line of red vermilion, i think its because one just does not want to give up hope. Imagine what it would be like, when you had jsut decided to let someone off all the pain, and jsut before yoiu did that , they got back to being normal? I guess, the guilt of killing, mercy or othrwise wud creep in, and thats why its not easy for someone to decide on this. just a thought.
@ Mariya
The whole thing is about your tolerance for seeing your loved one suffer.If your hope keeps you over the line, then you might never thing of euthanasia. It's more of subjective choice rather then being correct or wrong.
Post a Comment