NOBODY WOULD HAVE been as shocked as I was when I came across an Australian news column saying “Parents Walk Free after Killing Son”. Two Sydney parents pleaded guilty after having man slaughtered their severely disabled 29 year old son Matthew Sutton. On March 2007, they told the Supreme Court that a scheduled operation would leave him with limited
hearing ability on top of his existing disabilities. The parents were acquitted saying the act of crime was born out of extreme desperation. Their Lawyer Tony Blento was quoted saying “They are very pleased. They have been living with stress, depression, hardship for 30 odd years and they want to get on with their life”. (Source: ABC News Group).

With due respect to the judgment, this ruthless act of the parents seemed more of desperation to get rid of a burden in form of their Disabled son rather than any sort of love for him. There was another case, where a famous newsreader Tracey Spicer confessed to the
public saying she attempted to smother her ill mother with a pillow, unable to see her suffer. Though she was tried and acquitted, how could someone even think of taking the life of her
mother who actually gave her life?

Euthanasia or mercy killing may be described with different levels of complexity, it is nothing but a medical phenomenon of deliberately bringing out gentle and easy death, making the last few days of the patient as comfortable as possible. The irony in the situation is that an ill patient, who is on the verge of death instead of being given utmost love and care, is cruelly or rather shall I say mercilessly killed in the name of ‘Mercy killing’. Scientists have divided euthanasia into three types. When performed with the consent of the patient it is termed as
voluntary euthanasia, if it is forceful or against the will of the patient it is termed as Involuntary Euthanasia. The third category Passive Euthanasia is when the patient’s death is hastened by removing the life saving machines or by prescription of overdose of drugs. The third category gives rise to the “Principle of Double Effect” which is nothing but increasing the dosage of drugs such as Morphine which relieves pain and also in turn leads to death.

Though this practice has been legalized in Netherlands, Luxembourg, Belgium and Switzerland, but the debate became hotter in India when a recent Supreme Court verdict saying “Attempt to Suicide is not a crime” was passed. This was seen upon as a social approach to legalize Suicide and Euthanasia-assisted suicide and raised strong voices of opposition. Well if one looks into the well known trial of Dr. Arthur, a famous doctor in U.K. He was accused under the ‘charges of murder’ for prescribing over dosage of Codeine to a baby with Down’s syndrome which lead to its death. Many eminent witnesses were tried and most of them justified his act and the court acquitted him saying his motive was ‘compassion’. There is an argument saying if the fetus is abnormal or severely handicapped it should be eliminated before birth as such children are socially valueless. But don’t these physically handicapped & mentally retarded children have as much as right to live as others and deserve to get the needed care? What has this highly sympathetic society done for them? They have removed the word ‘handicap’ from the dictionary and replaced it by the term ‘Differently- Able’. Is this enough?

Hitler had a utilitarian philosophy; he preserved anybody who had utilitarian values and eliminated the rest. If Hitler’s philosophy is sadist then so is the policy of mercy killing! Patients should be looked upon as fellow beings made of muscles and blood and not just as a mere biological unit. In the biblical passages, the authors of the Bible do not appear to consider suicide to be a great moral sin. They seem to be regarded simply as straightforward personal decisions. However, the Christian church has traditionally deviated from the biblical message and has considered suicide to be a great moral sin. Some denominations have even refused to bury people who have committed suicide.

I believe that there are some circumstances when euthanasia is the morally correct action. I also understand that there are real concerns about legalizing euthanasia because of fear of misuse and/or overuse and the fear of the slippery slope leading to a loss of respect for the value of life. We do need to proceed with caution. We need full and open discussions improvements in research, the best palliative care available, and above all we need to think about the topic together.

Euthanasia is homicide. Some homicides may be justified until it comes to you.