Kerala priests on euthanasia verdict: God decides right to live; highlights

.story-content span .story-content p .story-content div color:#000!important;font-family: open sans Arial!important;font-size:15px!important ALSO READ SC mulls living will to die for passive euthanasia: All you need to know Mutiny in SC ranks: 4 judges go to people s court against CJI Dipak Misra SC crisis: It s not only about those 4 judges there are greater concerns SC judges air differences with CJI Misra: Controversy not new to judiciary span.p-content div id = div-gpt line-height:0;font-size:0 Right to die with dignity is a fundamental right the Supreme Court on Friday held and said that an individual could make an advance living will that would authorise passive euthanasia under certain circumstances. The apex court s Bench held that passive euthanasia and living will were legally valid. The apex court said that a person could prepare a living will under which the withdrawal of life-support system could be authorised if he reached an irreversible stage of terminal illness in the medical view. However while a five-judge Constitution Bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra allowed an individual to prepare the advance directive or living will it attached strict conditions for executing the will which would be made by a person in his or her normal state of health and mind. The apex court was delivering its verdict on a public interest litigation filed in 2005 by an NGO called Common Cause and argued by lawyer Prashant Bhushan. On May 11 2005 the Supreme Court had taken note of Common Cause s PIL seeking approval for terminally ill individuals to be allowed to execute a living will for passive https://www.sparkfun.com/users/1301951 euthanasia. The apex court had sought the Centre s response on the plea that sought the declaration of right to die with dignity as a Fundamental Right under Article 21 (right to life) of the Constitution. The court pronounced four separate but concurring judgments. Here is what a living will means and the top 10 developments around SC s passive euthanasia judgment: 1) Maharashtra medical fraternity welcomes SC ruling on euthanasia The medical fraternity in the state welcomed the Supreme Court s landmark judgment in which it recognised living will made by terminally-ill patients for passive euthanasia. Dr Abdul Ansari director of the critical care services of Nanavati Super Speciality Hospital said that the right to die was a landmark ruling which would allow people to die with dignity . He said We come across many terminally ill patients and families who feel burdened and express the feeling to die in peace rather than getting subjected to the dehumanising experience of being stranded on futile life support. 2) SC verdict on euthanasia could be misused says KCBC Senior Kerala priests said the Supreme Court judgment allowing terminally-ill patients passive euthanasia with conditions could be misused. Terming it unfortunate and condemnable Kerala Catholic Bishop Conference president Archbishop Soosa Paikam said the verdict was painful and would have disastrous consequences. The right of life is in the hands of God. It was not acceptable for anyone who believes in humanity to kill a person suffering from old age or sickness due to sympathy he said. 3) Now we have the right to die with dignity : The apex court held that an individual had the right to die with dignity and could make an advance living will to authorise the withdrawal of life-support system. The advance will would allow this if in the medical view the person concerned reached an irreversible stage of terminal illness. In his or her living will an individual could state in advance that his or her life should not be prolonged through the means of a ventilator or artificial support system. Recognising the right to die with dignity the court permitted a person to draft in advance a living will in case she/he slips into an incurable condition. 4) SC lays down strict conditions: While it allowed any person to prepare a living will the five-judge Constitution Bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra attached strict conditions for the execution of the will. The will would be made by a person in his normal state of health and mind. The Bench which also included justices A K Sikri A M Khanwilkar D Y Chandrachud and Ashok Bhushan laid down guidelines on who would execute the will and how the approval for passive euthanasia would be granted by the medical board. The life support system could be turned off only after the statutory medical board declared the patient in question to be incurable the apex court said. Further the Bench said that its guidelines and directives would remain in force until a legislation was brought regarding the issue. ALSO READ: SC allows Passive Euthanasia with guidelines 5) Allowing a meaningful existence : While allowing the framing of a living will for passive euthanasia Justice Chandrachud said that to deprive a person of dignity at the end of life was tantamount to depriving him or her of meaningful existence . Justice Chandrachud also said that life and death were inseparable. Bodies involve continuous change but mind remains constant... Death represents culmination of life... Freedom liberty are core of meaningful life he said. ALSO READ: Mumbai: Elderly couple writes to President seeking active euthanasia 6) Living will explained: However what exactly is a living will? According to Livelaw.in it is a written document allowing a patient to provide explicit instructions in advance regarding the medical treatment that is to be administered when he or she is terminally ill or no longer capable of expressing informed consent. The living will according to the site includes authorising a patient s family to switch off the life-support system if a medical board declares that the person is beyond medical help. ALSO READ: SC mulls living will to die for passive euthanasia: All you need to know 7) Passive euthanasia explained: The next question in people s mind would be what exactly is passive euthanasia. The Oxford Dictionary provides a simple explanation: Passive euthanasia is the withdrawal and/or withholding of life-sustaining medical treatment with the knowledge that doing so will lead to the patient s death. This differs from active euthanasia which according to the dictionary is the ending of a terminally ill patient s life through direct intervention including a lethal dose of painkilling drugs. 8) Passive euthanasia possible without living will too: In such a case where there is no living will that has been framed for passive euthanasia the family members of a terminally ill person could approach the high court under Article 226 Bar & Bench reported. According to the site detailed guidelines on how to deal with such pleas have also been laid down. ALSO READ: Victoria becomes first Australian state to legalise voluntary euthanasia 9) Govt opposed to living will: The government for its part had expressed its opposition to the idea of a living will during the hearing Livelaw.in reported. According to the site the government had argued that a living will could be misused adding that it might not be viable as a part of public policy. However it also said that it was in-principle in agreement with permitting passive euthanasia. 10) Judgment on a 2005 plea: The apex court s judgment came on a plea filed in 2005 by NGO Common Cause. The NGO was seeking the right to make a living will that would authorise the withdrawal of life-support system in the event of the will-maker reaching an irreversible vegetative state. Prashant Bhushan appeared for NGO: Appearing for the NGO Common Cause advocate Prashant Bhushan had said that since a patient in a coma could not express his or her wish to end his or her life the law should allow them to put it down in writing in advance so that they should not be tortured. In the absence of a law authorising doctors to do so they keep incurable patients on life support he had said. ALSO READ: All you need to know about Aruna Shanbaug Aruna Shanbaug case: On March 7 2011 in a separate plea on behalf of Aruna Shanbaug a nurse lying in a vegetative state at a hospital in Mumbai the apex court had allowed passive euthanasia. I had requested for mercy killing in 2014 & PM Modi took cognizance of the same & had told local officers to look into the matter. SC has taken a good decision we ve hope now: Anamika Mishra patient of Muscular Dystrophy on SC s verdict on #Euthanasia pic.twitter.com/L59jXAbCNM ANI (@ANI) March 9 2018 We re not fully satisfied with SC s judgement. People above the age of 75 should be given this right. They can verify the details of these people from the police & doctors. Govt should come up with a policy: Mr & Mrs Lavate who had asked for #Euthanasia pic.twitter.com/MtmBgVCa23 ANI (@ANI) March 9 2018 This is a monumental verdict. It is good that people can die in peace with some self-respect: Laxmi Yadav who wrote to Prime Minister & President for #Euthanasia pic.twitter.com/K0WvKFcYxn ANI (@ANI) March 9 2018 With agency inputs
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court found that while Hinduism Islam and Christianity were against euthanasia the concept was accepted in Jainism and Buddhism. Tracing a regulation under a law which sanctioned passive euthanasia in India albeit indirectly Justice Ashok Bhushan said the only statutory provision which referred to euthanasia was the Indian Medical Council (Professional Conduct Etiquette & Ethics) Regulations 2002 framed under the Indian Medical Council Act 1956. Justice Bhushan said the 2002 regulations prohibited a medical practitioner from practising active euthanasia but carved out an exception that on specific occasion the question of withdrawing support devices to sustain cardiopulmonary function even after brain death shall be decided by a team of doctors and not merely by the treating physician alone . The regulations further provide that team of doctors shall declare withdrawal of support system he added. Justice Bhushan unearthed euthanasia s link with religion and drew a contrast between the 2 500-year-old Hippocratic Oath of medical practitioners not to give a lethal drug to anyone nor to advise such a plan and almost contemporaneous view of Greek philosopher Plato who did not support medical treatment to those thoroughly diseased. Justice Bhushan quoted Plato s famous work The Republic in which he wrote But if a man had a sickly constitution and intemperate habits his life was worth nothing to himself or to anyone else; medicine was not meant for such people and they should not be treated though they might be richer than Midas. The judge added In ancient Indian religion sanctity was attached to a yogi who could discard his/her mortal coil (body) through the process of higher spiritual practices called yoga. Such state was known as samadhi . The Hindu scriptures also say that life and death is the gift of god and no human being has the right to take away the said gift. Suicide is disapproved in Hindu way of life and it is believed that those who commit suicide do not attain moksha or salvation from the cycle of life and death. Muslims also strongly condemn suicide as they believe life and death of a person depends on Allah s will and human beings are prohibited in going against his will... Christianity also disapproves taking of one s life. Bible says human being is a temple of god and the spirit of god dwelleth in the body and no man can defile the temple... However Justice Bhushan said Tenets of Jainism talk about the practice of religiously nominated self-build death called Sallkhana meaning fast unto death . Buddhist scriptures state that Lord Buddha had allowed self-build death for the extremely ill person as an act of compassion.
NEW DELHI: With the Supreme Court holding the right to die with dignity a fundamental right and recognising living will made by terminally-ill patients as permissible India has joined a league of select countries where passive euthanasia has been accorded legal sanctity. The Oxford English Dictionary defines euthanasia as the painless killing of a patient suffering from an incurable and painful disease or in an irreversible coma . The term is derived from the Greek euthanatos with eu meaning well and thanatos meaning death. In ancient Greece and Rome citizens were entitled to a good death to end the suffering of a terminal illness. There are different euthanasia laws in each country. It can be classified into five types - voluntary non-voluntary involuntary passive and active. India joins countries like Netherlands Canada Belgium Colombia and Luxembourg in legalising passive euthanasia. While dealing with the issue the five judges arrived at a concurrent finding by analysing the practise of euthanasia in various countries. Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justice A M Khanwilkar who wrote a separate judgement noted that in the US active euthanasia was illegal but physician-assisted death is legal in the states of Oregon Washington and Montana. A distinction has been drawn between euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide. In both Oregon and Washington only self-assisted dying is permitted. Doctor-administered assisted dying and any form of assistance to help a person commit suicide outside the provisions of the legislation remains a criminal offence. In Canada physician-assisted suicide is illegal according to Section 241(b) of the Criminal Code of Canada. In Germany assisted suicide is illegal. However this is not the case for passive assisted suicide. Thus if doctors stop life-prolonging measures on the written wishes of a patient it is not considered as a criminal offence. Besides it is legal for doctors in Germany to administer painkillers to a dying patient to ease pain. The painkillers cause low breathing that may lead to respiratory arrest and ultimately death.
Written by Ananthakrishnan G | New Delhi | Updated: March 10 2018 7:39 am A person who executes a directive may revoke the document at any stage before it is acted upon and implemented. Related News We want to go while our organs are still working says Mumbai coupleEuthanasia judgement: With verdict SC focuses on dignity rightsEuthanasia verdict: health experts hail Supreme Court judgement call it huge relief Recognising the right of a person to execute an advance directive that would specify his/her choice of medical treatment in case of a terminal illness the Supreme Court also laid down the procedure to be followed and elaborate safeguards lest the facility be misused. This is what the Constitution Bench said: WHO The advance directive can be executed only by an adult who is of a sound and healthy state of mind and in a position to communicate relate and comprehend the purpose and consequences of executing the document. It must be voluntarily executed and without any coercion or inducement or compulsion and after having full knowledge or information. It should have characteristics of an informed consent given without any undue influence or constraint. It shall be in writing clearly stating as to when medical treatment may be withdrawn or no specific medical treatment shall be given which will only have the effect of delaying the process of death that may otherwise cause him/her pain anguish and suffering and further put him/her in a state of indignity. WHAT The directive should clearly indicate the decision relating to the circumstances in which withholding or withdrawal of medical treatment can be resorted to. It should be in specific terms and the instructions must be absolutely clear and unambiguous and mention that the executor may revoke the instructions/authority at any time. It should disclose that the executor has understood the consequences of executing such a document and specify the name of a guardian or close relative who in the event of the executor becoming incapable of taking decision at the relevant time will be authorised to give consent to refuse or withdraw medical treatment in a manner consistent with the advance directive. In the event that there is more than one valid advance directive none of which have been revoked the most recently signed advance directive will be considered as the last expression of the patient s wishes and will be given effect to. HOW The document should be signed by the executor in the presence of two attesting witnesses preferably independent and countersigned by the jurisdictional Judicial Magistrate of First Class (JMFC) so designated by the concerned District Judge. The witnesses and the jurisdictional JMFC shall record their satisfaction that the document has been executed voluntarily and without any coercion or inducement or compulsion and with full understanding of all the relevant information and consequences. The Magistrate shall preserve a copy in his office besides one in digital format and forward one copy of the document to the Registry of the jurisdictional District Court which would preserve the same. Additionally the Registry of the District Judge shall retain the document in digital format. The Magistrate shall cause to inform the immediate family members of the executor if not present at the time of execution and make them aware about it. A copy shall be handed over to the competent officer of the local Government or the Municipal Corporation or Municipality or Panchayat who in turn shall nominate a competent official who shall be the custodian of the document. The Magistrate shall also cause to handover copy of the advance directive to the family physician if any. WHEN In the event the executor becomes terminally ill and is undergoing prolonged medical treatment with no hope of recovery and cure of the ailment the treating physician when made aware about the advance directive shall ascertain the genuineness and authenticity thereof from the jurisdictional JMFC before acting upon the same. Instructions in the document must be given due weight by the doctors. However it should be given effect to only after being fully satisfied that the executor is terminally ill and is undergoing prolonged treatment or is surviving on life support and that the illness of the executor is incurable or there is no hope of him/her being cured. If the physician treating the patient (executor of the document) is satisfied that the instructions given in the document need to be acted upon he shall inform the executor or his guardian / close relative as the case may be about the nature of illness the availability of medical care and consequences of alternative forms of treatment and the consequences of remaining untreated. He must also ensure that he believes on reasonable grounds that the person in question understands the information provided has cogitated over the options and has come to a firm view that the option of withdrawal or refusal of medical treatment is the best choice. The physician/hospital where the executor has been admitted for medical treatment shall then constitute a Medical Board consisting of the Head of the treating Department and at least three experts from the fields of general medicine cardiology neurology nephrology psychiatry or oncology with experience in critical care and with overall standing in the medical profession of at least twenty years who in turn shall visit the patient in the presence of his guardian/close relative and form an opinion whether to certify or not to certify carrying out the instructions of withdrawal or refusal of further medical treatment. This decision shall be regarded as a preliminary opinion. If the Hospital Medical Board certifies that the instructions contained in the advance directive ought to be carried out the physician/hospital shall forthwith inform the jurisdictional Collector about the proposal. The Collector in turn shall then immediately constitute a Medical Board comprising the Chief District Medical Officer of the concerned district as the Chairman and three expert doctors from the fields of general medicine cardiology neurology nephrology psychiatry or oncology with experience in critical care and with overall standing in the medical profession of at least twenty years (who were not members of the previous Medical Board of the hospital). They shall jointly visit the hospital where the patient is admitted and if they concur with the initial decision of the Medical Board of the hospital they may endorse the certificate to carry out the instructions given in the advance directive. The Board constituted by the Collector must beforehand ascertain the wishes of the executor if he is in a position to communicate and is capable of understanding the consequences of withdrawal of medical treatment. If the executor is incapable of taking decision or develops impaired decision making capacity then the consent of the guardian nominated by the executor in the advance directive should be obtained regarding refusal or withdrawal of medical treatment to the executor to the extent of and consistent with the clear instructions given in the advance directive. The Chairman of the Medical Board nominated by the Collector that is the Chief District Medical Officer shall convey the decision of the Board to the jurisdictional JMFC before giving effect to the decision to withdraw the medical treatment administered to the executor. The Magistrate shall visit the patient at the earliest and after examining all aspects authorise the implementation of the decision of the Board. A person who executes a directive may revoke the document at any stage before it is acted upon and implemented. If permission to withdraw medical treatment is refused by the Medical Board the executor or his family members or even the treating doctor or the hospital staff can approach the High Court by way of writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. Whenever a life support is withdrawn the same shall also be intimated by the Magistrate to the High Court. It shall be kept in a digital format by the Registry of the High Court apart from keeping the hard copy which shall be destroyed after the expiry of three years from the death of the patient. For all the latest India News download Indian Express App IE Online Media Services Pvt Ltd More Related News Life and death Passive euthanasia now legal: Health experts hail SC ruling say it was long due Tags: euthanasia supreme court MMazMar 10 2018 at 4:49 amOnce again the Supreme Court arrogates itself the power to pass laws with the consent of the Legislature or the Executive . Who the is the Supreme court to grant this right to people ? Does it have the permission of Lok Sabha ? The Rajya Sabha ? Has there been a discussion in Parliament about this ??/ The Supreme Court is making a mockery of the Cons ution of India by interpreting the Right to Life to make suicide permissible under guideline IT decided ? Who said these guidelines are practical ? Where is the public debate on this issue ?? The people of India have not been consulted but these bunch of unelected people in wearing gowns has decided for all of us ?? Is this a democracy or a Judicial tyranny ? What s next ? Will the interpret that the Right to Life to mean that terrorists cannot be shot even if they kill others ?? What kind of circus is this where the Supreme Court invents rights out of thin air ??(0)(0) ReplyIndian SinghMar 10 2018 at 6:23 amSUPREME COURT has just INTERPRETED CONSTI-TU-TION and hasn t passed any LAW. ............... As per HINDUS CUSTOM taking own life is allowed. Even LORD RAM who is considered MARYADA PURUSHOTAM - EPITOME of PERFECTION gave up his life by entering Sarayu River at GUPTHAR GHAT near Ayodhya. .......... There exist a temple too at that sight. Even Japanese and ancient Romans considered suicide as an ultimate expression of FREEDOM - The FREEDOM to DIE when you want. .................... The CHRISTIAN ISLAM and JEWISH concept of GOD GIVEN LIFE and so ONLY GOD CAN TAKE THAT LIFE is the reason for such comment from people like YOU. ................ When there can FAMILY PLANNING to CONTROL BIRTH there cannot be any reason NOT to allow DEATH by CHOICE.(0)(0) Reply
A look at the headlines right now: Human beings have the right to die with dignity says Supreme Court as it allows passive euthanasia: The bench issued guidelines to govern the execution of living wills.Out-marketed by BJP Congress needs to find new ways to connect with people says Sonia Gandhi: The former Congress president criticised the government on topics ranging from Aadhaar to communal tensions and mob vigilantism.Court extends Karti Chidambaram s CBI custody in INX Media case till March 12: Earlier in the day the Delhi High Court granted him interim relief from the Enforcement Directorate.Bengaluru court sends suspect in Gauri Lankesh murder case to SIT custody for five days: KT Naveen Kumar was named as the first accused in the matter.Man murders student outside her Chennai college campus arrested: Reports said the woman had earlier filed a complaint against the attacker but no action was taken. One week has gone waste says Venkaiah Naidu as Parliament is adjourned for the day again: The president accepted the resignation of two TDP leaders from the Union Cabinet as the party continued its protests demanding special category status for Andhra Pradesh.Rajasthan passes bill that makes rape of girls under 12 punishable by death: The government said it introduced the amendment because crimes against children were on the rise in the state.There was nothing suspicious about actor Sridevi s death says Ministry of External Affairs: Spokesperson Raveesh Kumar said if there was any foul play it would have come out by now .Ten arrested in Sri Lanka for communal clashes security heightened ahead of Friday prayers: Authorities reimposed a curfew in Kandy on Thursday night.Mohammad Shami charged with attempt to murder domestic violence on wife s complaint: The Kolkata Police also charged the pacer s elder brother with sections related to rape.
By: Express Web Desk | New Delhi | Updated: March 9 2018 1:47 pm Narayan and Iravati Lavate said they were not fully satisfied with the Supreme Court s judgment on passive euthanasia (Express Photo/Janak Rathod) Reacting to the Supreme Court judgment allowing passive euthanasia the Lavates on Friday said they were not fully satisfied with the order. The Mumbai-based couple who had previously approached the President of India seeking permission for active euthanasia or assisted suicide added the government should come up with a policy for people above the age of 75 to be given the right to euthanasia. The apex court in a landmark judgment today recognised the living will of terminally ill patients and allowed passive euthanasia. We re not fully satisfied with the Supreme Court s judgment. People above the age of 75 should be given this right. They can verify the details of these people from the police and doctors. The government should come up with a policy the couple was quoted as saying by news agency ANI. Narayan (88) and Iravati (78) are not suffering from any ailments but wish for assisted suicide as they do not wish to depend on hospitals. They are also driven by the satisfaction of having lived a happy life. Further the two fear having to live without the other. Also read | What is active passive euthanasia and living will ? The couple does not suffer from any ailments but wishes for assisted suicide as they do not wish to depend on hospitals. (Express Photo/Janak Rathod) There is a bill in Parliament that talks about euthanasia for terminally ill patients. But that is passive euthanasia I want active euthanasia. If there is right to life there should be right to death. We have lived our life satisfactorily Narayan had previously said. For all the latest India News download Indian Express App IE Online Media Services Pvt Ltd No Comments.
By: IANS | Mumbai | Updated: March 9 2018 5:56 pm Guzaarish narrated the story of a quadriplegic hero s (Hrithik Roshan) plea for death. Related News We want to go while our organs are still working says Mumbai coupleEuthanasia judgement: With verdict SC focuses on dignity rightsEuthanasia verdict: health experts hail Supreme Court judgement call it huge relief After the Supreme Court announced on Friday that a person has the right to die with dignity in case of an irreversible stage of terminal illness filmmaker Sanjay Leela Bhansali who tackled the theme of euthanasia in Guzaarish has recounted that the subject had sparked a hue and cry when the movie released in 2010. I remember when I had made Guzaarish there was plenty of hue and cry over my plea to allow the irreversibly ailing to end their lives Bhansali said. Guzaarish narrated the story of a quadriplegic hero s (Hrithik Roshan) plea for death. Now another Hollywood film seems to have taken from the idea of happy-dying in Guzaarish. Andy Serkis biopic Breathe is a real-life drama about Robin Cavendish who contracted polio at the age of 28 and defied doctors doomsday declarations by outliving all the medical prophecies. Cavendish played by Andrew Garfield decides to end his life in a nice and happy surrounding inviting his closest friends and loved ones for a farewell party on the night before he pulls the plug on his life. This was a scenario constructed in Guzaarish much earlier where the quadriplegic Ethan (Hrithik) invites his close friends over for a happy send-off. Aren t the similarities coincidental between two films made in two different continents and time zones Bhansali said: I haven t seen Breathe. But the similarities must be unintentional. Guzaarish was based on someone close to Bhansali he said. Though I am no stranger to pain what I saw in this person took pain and suffering to another level I realised that there comes a point in every life when a full stop is the only solution. While researching on the subject of euthanasia for the movie Bhansali had let go of all temptation to watch films on the subject of mercy killing. I didn t want to get even remotely influenced by my thought and vision by what other filmmakers have done on the subject he said. For all the latest Entertainment News download Indian Express App More Related News Passive euthanasia now legal: There are safeguards lest it be misused What is active passive euthanasia and living will ? Tags: euthanasia Sanjay Leela Bhansali No Comments.
ALSO READ Ranveer wants to work in more memorable films with Bhansali Can anyone dare to make film on Prophet Mohammed asks Giriraj Dream come true to record for Bhansali: Neeti Mohan Happy with the success of Padmaavat : Birthday boy Bhansali It s time for people to decide what they feel about Padmaavat span.p-content div id = div-gpt line-height:0;font-size:0 After the Supreme Court announced on Friday that a person has the right to die with dignity in case of an irreversible stage of terminal illness filmmaker Sanjay Leela Bhansali who tackled the theme of euthanasia in Guzaarish has recounted that the subject had sparked a hue and cry when the movie released in 2010. I remember when I had made Guzaarish there was plenty of hue and cry over my plea to allow the irreversibly ailing to end their lives Bhansali said. Guzaarish narrated the story of a quadriplegic hero s (Hrithik Roshan) plea for death. Now another Hollywood film seems to have taken from the idea of happy-dying in Guzaarish . Andy Serkis biopic Breathe is a real-life drama about Robin Cavendish who contracted polio at the age of 28 and defied doctors doomsday declarations by outliving all the medical http://www.babelcube.com/user/mohmid-khan prophecies. Cavendish played by Andrew Garfield decides to end his life in a nice and happy surrounding inviting his closest friends and loved ones for a farewell party on the night before he pulls the plug on his life. This was a scenario constructed in Guzaarish much earlier where the quadriplegic Ethan (Hrithik) invites his close friends over for a happy send-off. Aren t the similarities coincidental between two films made in two different continents and time zones? Bhansali said: I haven t seen Breathe . But the similarities must be unintentional. Guzaarish was based on someone close to Bhansali he said. Though I am no stranger to pain what I saw in this person took pain and suffering to another level I realised that there comes a point in every life when a full stop is the only solution. While researching on the subject of euthanasia for the movie Bhansali had let go off all temptation to watch films on the subject of mercy killing. I didn t want to get even remotely influenced in my thought and vision by what other filmmakers have done on the subject he said. (Subhash K Jha can be contacted at jhasubh@gmail.com) --IANS skj/rb/hs (This story has not been edited by Business Standard staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)