|Clinging on for life|
By all practical reasons, if you look at the case from a totally non-emotional perspective, you would find the judgement still in jeopardy...for 37 years of punishment of lying in vegetative state of total dependence on others for survival is not a simple thing. People who have been helping Aruna are doing a marvellous job, at the same time, what is that you are achieving by just keeping her alive for another 20 years awaiting her natural death. Just like a vegetable awaiting to be rotten by nature. If she could speak, I think she would opt to go in peace, and die in dignity than showing expressions that have no meaning and looks that dont reach her actual senses. Same time, if you think from a mere human angle, no other human being has a ethical right to take the life of another. So there the debate ends.
As a personal victim of such a situation with an ailing aunt, who prayed every minute of her bed ridden days with both her legs immovable and her body sulking, asking all God's she knows for death....I know how important death is at times than just hanging on a life that have no more meaning, but only pain, anxiety and tolerance. Do we still need to get to such a state of mind, to let go things with grace or still we are so closed minds who cannot understand the real pain and stick to religious contexts, legal bindings and emotional speeches? Every life will have a death. How it happens and where it happens no one knows. In such circumstances, for those whose life's contain no resurrection, a peaceful death would be a blessing.
Should commend the Supreme Court judgement to transform two important judgements as part of this case:
1. Making Suicide as a depression act and not a punishable offense. This is not going to have a larger impact on those depressed minds those already succeed, but would be a great blessing for those who survive such attempts and then realize the importance of life
2. Consentful removal of the Life Support - This is again a laudable judgement as most of the hospitals exploiting patients and their relatives in those cases where they know that the end is just at the stroke of a electric button, would be graceful enough to do the needful at each circumstance.
The real reason why Euthanasia cannot be legalized in India, is for the greed of people that would make things worse in many cases. Like in George Fernandez who had once been a political tiger is now at the mercy of his relatives and can be susceptible to such a practice for the sake of property and inheritance. It is good that such a thing is not legalized and will be handled case to case.
Euthanasia one one hand provides relief from extreme pain, and depriving and demeaned quality of life, and become a freedom of choice of survival...there by giving more possibility to help those in need, by organ donation and sustaining life as needed through others.....
The flip side of the coin is it devalues human life....for those vulnerable moments of paralyzed existence would mean putting an voluntary or involuntary end to a life...though it would be a blessing for terminally ill. If there is no road to recovery., then it is best to burn the bridge. Yet, it takes lot of courage and ethical reasoning to do so.
Every law is made to make lives of the people better, safer and peaceful. If so, then there can be laws made to let people make choice when they are of sound mind and healthy thoughts.... with exceptional cases like of Aruna where destiny alone can answer to her fate.