The Supreme Court of India reviews a heartbreaking euthanasia plea by parents of a child in a persistent vegetative state for 13 years. The case raises urgent questions on passive euthanasia and end-of-life care in India.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: In a hearing, the Supreme Court of India examined a euthanasia plea filed by the parents of a child who has been in a persistent vegetative state for over 13 years. The case has once again brought to the forefront the sensitive issues surrounding passive euthanasia and end-of-life care in India.
Child in Critical Condition
During the hearing, the Supreme Court described the child’s condition as “very, very unfortunate.” Reports indicated that the child has suffered extensive bedsores, a clear sign of prolonged suffering and inadequate care. The court noted that modern medical interventions, such as waterbeds, can prevent bedsores, emphasizing that the current situation was “extremely painful” for the child.
Doctors involved in the case stated unequivocally that recovery is no longer possible, making this one of the most heart-wrenching cases of long-term vegetative care in India. The court emphasized,
“Doctors have said in so many words that there is no question of recovery. So he is to remain like this till he is destined to leave.”
Legal Proceedings
The counsel representing the child’s parents referred to the Common Cause judgment, which provides guidelines for granting passive euthanasia. According to the counsel, a primary medical board comprising five experts had already evaluated the child. Therefore, the case did not initially require the formation of a secondary medical board.
“As per the judgment, the next step is to admit him to a neuro-palliative facility where life support will be withdrawn.”
However, the court insisted that a secondary medical board be constituted to examine the child, as per procedural requirements. AIIMS (All India Institute of Medical Sciences) has been directed to form this secondary board and provide a report by next Wednesday. This report will guide the court in taking the final decision on life support withdrawal and admission to a neuro-palliative care facility.
“We should now order that a secondary medical board be constituted for the purpose of examination of the patient. We request AIIMS to constitute the secondary board and give us a report by next Wednesday.”
Supreme Court’s Observations
The court expressed deep concern for the child’s suffering, stating:
“We can’t allow him to live like this. That’s for sure.”
The Supreme Court also criticized the state of care, noting that modern interventions such as waterbeds could prevent painful bedsores, highlighting the ethical responsibility of caregivers and medical professionals.
Also Read: Supreme Court: Doctors Must Prescribe Only Generic Medicines, No Brand Names Allowed!
It highlighted the importance of ethical medical care and the need for stringent evaluation before deciding on euthanasia.
