Washington23 - Breaking News and Updates

Aruna Shanbaug has been lying incapacitated in a Mumbai hospital for 37 years. Since 2009, when journalist Pinki Virani started campaigning for the 60-year old woman to be allowed to die, Ms. Shanbaug has become the focal point of the debate on euthanasia in India, where it is illegal.

Agence France-Presse/Getty Images
File photo of Aruna Shanbaug.

On Monday, India’s Supreme Court rejected the appeal to put an end to the life of Ms. Shanbaug, who doctors have considered brain dead ever since November 1973, when she suffered injuries as a result of a sexual assault.
The court  has, however, laid  down guidelines that could provide a legal framework to permit passive euthanasia, or the inactive mercy killing of incurably-ill patients. This entails doctors withdrawing medical treatment from patients with no prospect of recovery rather than administering procedures that would end their life.
“If a patient is in coma or on a heart lung machine, withdrawing of the machine will ordinarily result in passive euthanasia. Similarly not giving life-saving medicines in certain situations or denying food may result in passive euthanasia,” the court ruled Monday.
However, the court said these could only be implemented if ” Parliament makes a law on the subject.”
The court considered the present case as one of non-voluntary passive euthanasia: “Voluntary euthanasia is where the consent is taken from the patient, whereas non-voluntary euthanasia is where the consent is unavailable or when the patient is in coma.”
The court’s judgment was welcomed by Ms. Shanbaug caretakers, who had made an emotional plea saying they would carry on taking care of her.  Ms. Shanbaug’s family had abandoned her to the care of hospital workers, days after  it became clear she would never recover.
“The nursing staff is very attached to her and happy by the court’s verdict not to murder Aruna,” Sanjay Oak, dean at Mumbai’s King Edward Memorial Hospital, told India Real Time on Monday.
Dr. Roop Gursahani, the doctor appointed by the Supreme Court to examine Ms. Shanbaug’s medical condition, told India Real Time: “There was a legal vacuum earlier; (Monday’s) verdict will provide a legal framework to apply for justice for those who are not in a position to decide for themselves.”
Sangita Bhayana, a Delhi High Court lawyer said the judgment in Ms. Shanbaug’s case did not solve this issue because “it is a case-based decision depending on the circumstances of the patient.” Ms. Bhayana said Ms. Shanbaug’s was a particular case because she wasn’t unable to express her will on whether to live or die.
Ms. Virani was not immediately reachable for comment.

Fuente: India Real Time