Whether Soul Super Soul Evil Soul Exists

SR No.: 006937
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Suvarna Jain
Publisher: Suvarna Jain
Publication Year: 2013
Total Pages: 184
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 20 MB

Page 126

The intentional termination of the life of one human by another is contrary to medical profession.
A patient who is dying of incurable cancer of the throat is in terrible pain which can no longer be satisfactorily alleviated. He is certain to die within a few days even if present treatment is continued but he does not want to go on living for those days since the pain is unbearable so he asks the doctor for an end to it & his family joins in the request suppose doctor agrees to withhold treatment as the conventional doctrine says he may.
The justification for his doing so is that the patient is in terrible agony & since he is going to die in anyway it would be wrong to prolong his suffering needlessly. If he holds treatment it takes patient longer to die & he may suffer more than he would if more direct acti were taken to end a lethal injection given when once decision is taken not to prolong life & end suffering then active luthanasia is preferable.
Doctrine of passive Euthanasia leads to decision concerning life & death made on irrelevant grounds. Now in case of infants with down's syndrome babies lives on the operation to remove an intentinal obstruction is not difficult.
Then, why such operations are not performed?
If the life of such an infant is worth preserving, what does it matter if it needs a simple operation? What happens to have an unobstructed intestinal tract?
Here matter of life & death of being is decided on irrelevant grounds. . .
In .active & passive Euthnasia has difference that people think killing someone is morally worse than letting die.
In one case one evening child is taking bath & his uncle drowns the child & arrange things to look like accident. In 2nd case one plans that child slip & hit his head & his face fall into water & child drowns by himself accidently he watches him drowning & does nothing. In 2nd case one merely, let the child die. In 1st case one kills the child. Both man acted from same motive is personal gain had same end in view when they acted.
In Euthanasia doctors don't involve personal gain or destruct normal healthy child. Doctors are only concerned with patients life has become, or will soon become terrible burden has same moral position in killing & letting die or giving lethal injection. This decision is wrong. If patient in fact is curable then decision is regrettable.
Mercy killing - cessation of treatment is intentional termination of life. In passive Euthnasia doctor does nothing but let him die’. When
121