Along With the Right to Live, should We also Get the Right to Die?
Introduction
- The right to life is a moral principle that values people’s right to live and believes that one human being should not kill another human. It is universally accepted and underlined under the UN Declaration of Human Rights.
- The Indian Constitution grants the right to life in Article 21, which has been widely interpreted by the Supreme Court to include several rights-right to sleep, right to privacy, right to go abroad, right against public hanging, etc.
- However, the right to life does not include the right to die by default. The right to die is also understood as a moral principle that allows human beings to end their own lives.
- Main argument of the essay: There cannot be straightforward yes or no answer to the right to die because it depends on the context and is case-specific. We cannot grant everyone the right to die and cannot deny it to everyone either.
Body
- Different meanings of ‘right to die’-suicide, active euthanasia (the painless killing of a patient suffering from an incurable and painful disease or in an irreversible coma), passive euthanasia, assisted suicide, and medically assisted suicide. Each of these terms have different connotations and have different acceptance levels.
- Different religions and cultures have different acceptance levels for the decision to take one’s own life.
- Hinduism accepts the right to die, but with certain qualifications. People who have a terminal illness, no desire, or no ambition can end their lives in a nonviolent manner by fasting till death. It is called prayopavesa.
- Jainism also, like Hinduism, accepts the right to die; the practice is called santhara.
- Christianity on the other hand considers suicide to be a sin.
- In India, the attempt to commit suicide was a criminal offence, but it has recently been decriminalized. Some countries such as Canada, Netherlands, and Switzerland have legalized some forms of euthanasia, which is not legal in India.
Arguments for right to die:
- A person with terminal illness and pain, i.e. , someone with intense physical suffering, has a way to end their misery and that of their loved ones.
- People who care for those who are in coma for long periods with no hope of revival should be allowed to take decisions to euthanize in order to lift the emotional and financial burden on themselves. A case in point is that of Aruna Shanbaug, who spent most of her life in coma, and the hospital/nurses taking care of her were not allowed to euthanize her.
- People have the right to their life and body and, as a result, they should be able to dispose of it as they like.
- If the right to live is a human right, the right to die should also be a human right, as it grants freedom to humans.
- The right to die offers a dignified way for many to end their lives instead of becoming dependent on others even for smallest things such as feeding oneself.
Arguments against right to die:
- The state has a responsibility to take care of its citizens and it should be able to prevent irrational people from committing suicides over trivial reasons. Suffering is a very subjective matter, and this right may be used indiscreetly by people who have low thresholds of tolerance. Such a concept will then defeat the very purpose of life.
- If caretakers are allowed to decide on euthanasia, they might make selfish decisions to avoid having to spend time and money on patients.
- Religious people argue that life is a gift of the God and it should not be in the hands of people to take away such gift.
- If we examine the idea of right to life carefully, we will realize that it does not mean the right to be born-we actually do not decide our birth. Similarly, we must not have the right to die, which many consider to be a predestined event.
- We cannot know the wishes of a person in coma and as a result cannot decide to end their life when they are incapable of approving such a decision.
- Different cultures have different opinions on the right to die, and it is dear that no group can totally accept or reject the right to die. The right cannot be universal but the following qualifications should be applied to it:
- People with a terminal illness that has no cure-cases where their mental faculty has completely failed.
- Decision to end one’s life should be taken under rational mind without any pressure or fear from external source, thus it should be an autonomous choice.
- It should be the best option under the circumstances.
- It should not be an impulsive decision or decision under a mental illness. It should be decided after due deliberation.
Conclusion
- The right to life is universal but the right to die is not so.
- Different religions, cultures, and governments have differing attitudes towards suicide and euthanasia.
- We cannot have a universal permission or a blanket ban on the right to die, since this issue is complex and requires case by case consideration.
- As a result, the right to die should be granted with certain qualifications, by following the principles of autonomy, rationality, dignified death etc.
Notes
- Keywords: right, live, die
- Consider the counter-arguments properly in this essay in order to strengthen your own argument.
- Treat this indicative as one of the formats of argument on this topic; you can use your own creativity and reasons.