Abstract

This paper considers the contemporary legal and ethical debates on the right to die with dignity in euthanasia, passive euthanasia, and advance directives end-of-life decision-making process. It finds footings in judgments beginning with Common Cause v. Union of India and Harish Rana v. Union of India. Issues considered involve an intricate interplay between personal autonomy, law limitations, and cultural values. This analysis takes advantage of the variety of international approaches, from progressive legislation in assisted dying in Canada to regulatory frameworks in Europe, in underlining the global movement toward respecting the autonomy of individuals in end-of-life care. This paper reports how current legal systems do not allow end choices freely rather provide only for passive euthanasia, though with the severest guidelines imposed in India. Procedural steps have recently been relaxed as a circumspect movement towards personally chosen decisions within the benevolent yet legally protected bounds. The said future avenues through which informed decisions may then be made at the end include the simplification of legal processes, raising public awareness, and even greater extension of palliative care. The paper is an appeal for balanced policies regarding the sanctity of life and maintaining the dignity of autonomous choice. One of the most sensitive moral questions facing modern health care. It calls for policies that meet ethical standards by comparing respect for individual rights with care and providing a compassionate human framework in end-of-life care.

Keywords