Artificial Deprivation of Human Life: The Legal, Moral and Religious Controversy of Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide

Abstract

Euthanasia or assisted suicide could be defined as the practice of artificial deprivation of human life to end unbearable and incurable suffering of a terminally ill person. Medical Historians believe that ancient Greeks and Romans were in support of the concept of mercy killing rather than denying the whole notion. While opponents and proponents of euthanasia have not arrived at a mutual understanding yet, Oregon, USA was the first state to decriminalize euthanasia while Netherlands and Belgium were the first nations to legalize assisted suicide. While many countries across the globe comprising a few in Asia including Japan, have adopted similar means, Sri Lanka remains inflexible when it comes to this subject. Any sort of intentional taking of human life is considered an offence in Sri Lanka and Article 296 of the penal code prescribes death penalty for such actions which amount to the offence of murder. Suicide is also considered an offence under article 299 of the penal code and a person who aids and assists suicide could be penalized with capital punishment though Sri Lanka has adopted a de-facto moratorium on executions since 1976. The only instance where Sri Lankan law allows wilful ending of human life is under section 303 of the penal code where medical termination of pregnancy is possible strictly under the condition of preservation of mother’s life. This qualitative research was carried out as a literature-based, comparative study, and it concentrates on the concept of euthanasia, assisted suicide, the legal, moral, and religious controversy it has led to with examples from other countries while considering the possibility of decriminalizing physician-assisted suicide in Sri Lanka for terminally ill patients, under stringent conditions and suggesting in favour of voluntary passive euthanasia.