Monday 15 February 2016

Is there a right to kill ?




I am tempted to again get into the confusing and controversial concept of rights. The right to live does not automatically confer the right to die because birth and death are not part of one's rights. You cannot be born when, how and where you wish and this should be applied equally to death as well. But, the stretch between birth and death namely life that is, the way of living is somehow considered your right. You cannot be dictated as to how you should live. Therefore, the right to live with dignity or otherwise cannot be stretched to include a right to live or die. I am also of the opinion that a “living will" which is quite legal for your property, is not acceptable for euthanasia. Writing a will is legal for the wealth acquired by you but not to end your life which is not acquired by you and hence not your right! That is why suicide is not legal. . When suicide for a specific reason by an individual is not permitted how can we have death penalty? A judge is also a human and is therefore likely to err in judgement. How can the judgement of a death sentence be accepted which cannot be reverted after execution? Any punishment is often said to deter the punished from repeating the crime. If he is hanged to death how can it be a deterrent to him? I have never heard of a death sentence deterring others from committing that crime. Even accidents which kill people, fail in a country like India to deter people from driving without obeying rules. A harsh life imprisonment if fully implemented may deter some people. Same arguments of right to death have been raised for euthanasia and it has so far not been permitted in many countries including those which punish criminals with death sentences. But those who have seen the sufferings of terminally ill patients, who have no chance of recovery, will definitely agree to euthanasia.  If at all, a law for euthanasia is to be enacted, the most important class should be that the individual to be euthanized is above the prevalent maximum age of over 10% of the population. It may vary. Now, it can be fixed as eighty years in countries like India. Just as the government fixed frequently the prevailing market value of several things like land, an expert committee could decide on this from time to time and passive euthanasia may be permissible for those above this age subject to conditions. Let us not pass a law for euthanasia without thorough analysis on different counts. I ventured writing this because recently I read about this in the editorial column of a reputed Indian Newspaper.

No comments: