Its a good decision to legalize passive euthanasia. No doubt, there are cases of miraculous recovery but when someone is in a state of coma for very long duration and is unlikely to recover at all, then may be its better to administer passive euthanasia. 

I am in two minds about euthanasia because of the many implications it can have. As long as there are enough measures to oversee the implementation it is ok, or else it can be taken advantage of.

Keeping a person alive on life supports is easy for wealthy person. But it is not possible for a poor person to live in life support for long time. If case is hope less than respectful death is better than life of district.

usha manohar wrote:

I am in two minds about euthanasia because of the many implications it can have. As long as there are enough measures to oversee the implementation it is ok, or else it can be taken advantage of.

I hope the law is stringent and without loopholes to see that only where there is such a necessity, it is done. I think most probably it can be taken as an advantage unless the Doctors and the medical team are able to really understand what the patient's kin want - Is it peace for the patient or whether the situation is being taken advantage of where such necessity is not required.

The assessment should be made by the Doctor and his team. Doctors and their team plays a very important role in this decision.

epraneeth77 wrote:

usha manohar wrote:

I am in two minds about euthanasia because of the many implications it can have. As long as there are enough measures to oversee the implementation it is ok, or else it can be taken advantage of.

I hope the law is stringent and without loopholes to see that only where there is such a necessity, it is done. I think most probably it can be taken as an advantage unless the Doctors and the medical team are able to really understand what the patient's kin want - Is it peace for the patient or whether the situation is being taken advantage of where such necessity is not required.

The assessment should be made by the Doctor and his team. Doctors and their team plays a very important role in this decision.

Doctors are not super human and get easily swayed like others as we have seen from a number of cases where they have been involved in mal practices..

epraneeth77 wrote:

usha manohar wrote:

I am in two minds about euthanasia because of the many implications it can have. As long as there are enough measures to oversee the implementation it is ok, or else it can be taken advantage of.

I hope the law is stringent and without loopholes to see that only where there is such a necessity, it is done. I think most probably it can be taken as an advantage unless the Doctors and the medical team are able to really understand what the patient's kin want - Is it peace for the patient or whether the situation is being taken advantage of where such necessity is not required.

The assessment should be made by the Doctor and his team. Doctors and their team plays a very important role in this decision.

Yes role of doctors is important. What will happen if doctors advice to keep alive on life supports, but person have not source to pay for it.

usha manohar wrote:

epraneeth77 wrote:

usha manohar wrote:

I am in two minds about euthanasia because of the many implications it can have. As long as there are enough measures to oversee the implementation it is ok, or else it can be taken advantage of.

I hope the law is stringent and without loopholes to see that only where there is such a necessity, it is done. I think most probably it can be taken as an advantage unless the Doctors and the medical team are able to really understand what the patient's kin want - Is it peace for the patient or whether the situation is being taken advantage of where such necessity is not required.

The assessment should be made by the Doctor and his team. Doctors and their team plays a very important role in this decision.

Doctors are not super human and get easily swayed like others as we have seen from a number of cases where they have been involved in mal practices..

Could not agree more, but in the current situation they are having a moral responsibility to be unbiased and objective in their decisions and not get swayed away, at least for these sensitive issues. 

Hope soon the law is modified to make sure that a certificate from any eligible person is taken after he sees the patient and performs the necessary procedures after which he comes to a conclusion whether passive euthanasia is required or not.

Even that may be bought by money but still the law has to make sure that if a person is found guilty in these cases of giving certificate through money or any such inducement he will be punishable.

epraneeth77 wrote:

usha manohar wrote:

epraneeth77 wrote:

usha manohar wrote:

I am in two minds about euthanasia because of the many implications it can have. As long as there are enough measures to oversee the implementation it is ok, or else it can be taken advantage of.

I hope the law is stringent and without loopholes to see that only where there is such a necessity, it is done. I think most probably it can be taken as an advantage unless the Doctors and the medical team are able to really understand what the patient's kin want - Is it peace for the patient or whether the situation is being taken advantage of where such necessity is not required.

The assessment should be made by the Doctor and his team. Doctors and their team plays a very important role in this decision.

Doctors are not super human and get easily swayed like others as we have seen from a number of cases where they have been involved in mal practices..

Could not agree more, but in the current situation they are having a moral responsibility to be unbiased and objective in their decisions and not get swayed away, at least for these sensitive issues. 

Hope soon the law is modified to make sure that a certificate from any eligible person is taken after he sees the patient and performs the necessary procedures after which he comes to a conclusion whether passive euthanasia is required or not.

Even that may be bought by money but still the law has to make sure that if a person is found guilty in these cases of giving certificate through money or any such inducement he will be punishable.

If a person give certificate for money must be charged u/s 302.

I opposed to euthanasia in whatever way it is implemented. It goes against the will of God