In a “living will” an individual, who is fully conscious, outlines in advance how they would like to go if it comes to a life-support situation | Photo Credit: MarioGuti

It’s less than two weeks since Harish Rana’s passing, after 13 years in coma. His life support was withdrawn after the Supreme Court accepted his parents’ plea to end the suffering of the 31-year-old — making history as an act of “passive euthanasia” in the country.

“Passive euthanasia” involves withholding life support, allowing life to take its course, and has been at the centre of several legal, medical and ethical discussions in the country. One of the most high-profile and tragic cases involved nurse Aruna Shanbaug, who had been brutally attacked and raped, leaving her in a vegetative state for 42 years. This case also went up to the SC. But her fellow nurses insisted she remain in their care, till she passed away at Mumbai’s KEM hospital in 2015.

Around the world, countries approach end-of-life with progressive frameworks to ensure “dignity in death” for those choosing it. There are uncomfortable conversations to be had but, increasingly, people are engaging with them, paving the pathway for a dignified passing. There are provisions like a “living will” and “DNR” (do not resuscitate) in India.

In a “living will”, an individual, who is fully conscious, outlines in advance how they would like to go if it comes to a life-support situation, explains cardiologist Dr K Srinath Reddy. A DNR is a medical instruction from a hospitalised person (and their physician), indicating they do not want to be resuscitated if their heart or breathing stops. In the case of young Rana, who suffered severe head injuries after accidentally falling from a balcony in 2013, there was no living will or DNR.  

Right to go with dignity  

The treating team feels medically bound to provide care for the individual, says Dr Reddy. And the parents, in Rana’s case, approached the court to let their son go in dignity, to end his suffering. Families cannot take such decisions independently, and it is advisable to have two panels to help guide the end-of-life decision, says Dr Reddy, founder and former President, Public Health Foundation of India.  

There are several societal and religious overtones, too, when it comes to end-of-life discussions, he says, adding that the medical fraternity also needs to reorient itself, as doctors sometimes see death as personal defeat.   

For Dr Reddy, this discussion comes from a personal space, having seen his 90-year-old mother (a reputed professor of obstetrics and gynaecology) choosing not to spend her final days “in a hospital, with tubes, and no family members around”, he recounts, adding with pride that she had in her lifetime helped several women give birth to their babies.    

The final journey is personal, for the individual and their loved ones. And more discussion is needed among care-givers to ensure this decision-making process is handled with sensitivity and empathy, says Dr Reddy.

More Like This

Published on April 6, 2026