Direction (set of 5 questions): You have a brief passages with 5 questions following it. Read the passages carefully and answer the questions.
After 14 years of debates and several draft Bills, the government has said it is ready to frame a law on passive euthanasia, the act of withdrawing medical treatment with the deliberate intention of causing the death of a terminally ill patient.
Expert panel, setup by the Union Health and Family Welfare Ministry, made changes and cleared the formulation of a law on passive euthanasia after extensive debates from July 2014 to June 2015.
Over a decade ago (2006), the government felt that legislation on euthanasia would amount to doctors violating the Hippocratic Oath and that they should not yield to a patient’s “fleeting desire out of transient depression” to die.
The government's latest stand on euthanasia represents forward movement in the quest for a legislative framework to deal with the issue. In 2011 verdict, the Supreme Court ruled out active euthanasia and allowed 'passive euthanasia', or the withdrawal of life support, subject to safeguards. It made it mandatory that every instance should get the approval of a High Court Bench, based on consultation with a panel of medical experts.
The experts have not agreed to active euthanasia because of its potential for misuse and have proposed changes to a draft Bill suggested by the Law Commission.
There seems to be no support for the idea of a 'living will', as the draft says any such document will be not binding on any medical practitioner. This is logical as the law will be designed specifically to deal with patients not competent to decide for themselves. This has to be tested against the argument that giving those likely to drift into terminal illness an advance opportunity to make an informed choice will help them avoid "cruel and unwanted treatment". To resolve this conflict between pain and death, the sooner that a comprehensive law on the subject is enacted, the better it will be for society.
What argument has been presented in the passage in support of the idea of 'living wills'?
It will give the patients an advance opportunity to make an informed choice to help them avoid "cruel and unwanted treatment".
The right to live with dignity under Article 21 includes the right to die with dignity, and thus it is time to allow 'living wills'.
A 'living will' will be binding on any medical practitioner as it is made by the patient himself, why he/she was competent enough to make such choices.