EUTHANASIA

Euthanasia is commonly known as ‘mercy killing’ In Greek, "eu" means both "well" and "easy" and "Thanatos" is death. Euthanasia is the intentional premature termination of another person's life by direct intervention (active euthanasia) where the patients have gone beyond the limits of treatment and rehabilitation. Thus their death becomes inevitable. This is in no way, denying the material mortality of all other human beings but only to justify that the real meaning of death becomes clearer when it is seen as a surety instead of a chance. Euthanasia can also be brought about by withholding life-prolonging measures and resources (passive euthanasia), either at the express or implied request of that person (voluntary euthanasia), or in the absence of such approval (non-voluntary euthanasia). Involuntary euthanasia - where the individual wishes to go on living - is a euphemism for murder.
All this seems to be pretty clear and easy, but it is only until the problem is brought under the realm of philosophy and religion (ideas governing the minds of many). Like every other issue, euthanasia has its proponents as well as opponents. The fundamental argument of those against euthanasia is perhaps an easy guess – it is suicide! I believe it is imperative here to clarify that suicide in itself is a wider term and we need to resolve on its true definition. Self-sacrifice, avoidable martyrdom, engaging in life risking activities, refusal to prolong one's life through medical treatment are all closely related to suicide. They all involve a deliberately self-inflicted death. But does one have a right to take one's life? The answer is: it depends. Certain cultures and societies encourage suicide. Both Japanese kamikaze and Jewish martyrs were extolled for their suicidal actions. Certain professions and industries are knowingly life-threatening like the manufacture of armaments and cigarettes boost overall mortality rates. In general, suicide is commended when it serves social ends, enhances the cohesion of the group, upholds its values, multiplies its wealth, or defends it from external and internal threats.
However many major religions/ideas in the world disallow subjective suicide by putting forward their own clarification, justification and rationalization. Society is a superior platform as it deals at a scale which is wide and all encompassing. Owing to the fact that each individual is born with unique strengths and weaknesses, and therefore, somewhere, maybe suicide is all justified and true; society on the whole only caters to the general repercussions. It fears that influences of such nature can engulf healthier, happier or even mentally weak individuals and thus wreak major havocs unknown to the human kind before.

Apart from this, majority of the population does not have the awareness or the courage to challenge the established and to cap it all, many consider themselves to be the pioneers and saviours of the laws put forward by the ideologies. People are mostly driven by religious fundamentalism or lack of true knowledge. Intolerance and erratic emotions, both pave the way for a conservative and conformist society. On these grounds it is fairly easy to visualize that a majority of the population has developed a subjective abhorrence towards euthanasia and even more strongly for suicide.

Life is indeed a complex web of both logic and emotions, where the importance of both cannot be denied. Adopting euthanasia involves passing through a cascade of both of these. There are naturally people who simply cannot decree a death of their loved ones even when life has become synonymous to death alone, while there are others who believe in the physical emancipation of the patients. But there are instances when the problem is ejected out of emotions and brought down to sad ground realities. It is fairly easy to come across a situation in a hospital or a hospice, where a poor family is over burdened by the colossal costs of medical treatment. Dilemma sets in. Should they linger on and expend huge sums of money on a potentially dead person or resort to measures which can at least save the rest of them from a detrimental end?

Is euthanasia ever justified? I believe it is, but only on grounds which are perhaps on their own not thoroughly justified. I suppose one thing to be glaringly evident; euthanasia can never be bracketed with suicide. Suicide involves a decision of the certain individual only, in which he thinks life to have gone beyond control or is not worth living. But such a decision can sometimes be saturated with emotional instability or subjectivity. On the other hand euthanasia involves a decision coming forth from an objective analysis of doctors and the experts. But it is quite possible for the decision to be restricted by an unknown time frame. What if the cure to victim’s disease is found only ten minutes after euthanasia? The problem here lies in accepting the superiority of science over miracles or denying the inherent uncertainty present in the universe.

I am certain that if we are able to resolve on predicting the absolute death of human being ‘euthanasia’ would lose its charm as a controversy.