India's top court allows removal of life support of man in vegetative state
📖 Full Retelling
Harish Rana has been in a vegetative state since 2013, when he fell from a balcony and suffered head injuries.
Entity Intersection Graph
No entity connections available yet for this article.
Original Source
India's top court allows removal of life support of man in vegetative state 31 minutes ago Share Save Cherylann Mollan Share Save In a landmark ruling, India's Supreme Court has allowed the removal of life support of a 31-year-old man who has been in a vegetative state for more than a decade. This is the first instance of court-approved passive euthanasia - the act of withdrawing or withholding life-sustaining treatment - in India. The man, Harish Rana, had not left a will specifying directives for his treatment before he had an accident. India legalised passive euthanasia in 2018 but active euthanasia - any act that intentionally helps a person kill themselves - remains illegal. Rana suffered serious head injuries after falling from a fourth-floor balcony in 2013. He has remained in a comatose state since then. Over the years, his parents petitioned courts several times to allow their son's life support system to be removed. They have said in interviews to local media that they had exhausted all their savings caring for Rana and were worried about what would happen to him after they died. On Wednesday, Rana's father, Ashok Rana, said in a statement that his family was grateful to the Supreme Court for its "humanitarian" judgement. "This is a difficult decision for our family but we are doing what's best for Harish," he added. Rana's case had sparked a debate in India around the ethics of court-approved passive euthanasia, with some noting that it goes against the principle of self-determination, which is the foundation of a living will. A living will is a legal document which allows a person over 18 years to choose the medical care they would like to receive if they develop a terminal illness or condition with no hope of recovery. For example, they could specify that they don't want to be put on life-support machines or insist that they want to be given adequate pain-relieving medication. In this case, Rana was not able to give his consent or expressly state that h...
Read full article at source