CHAPTER 1
Introduction of Topic
“Nemo MoriturusPraesumiturMentire”
It means that nobody dies with a lie in their mouth and if they do so, they would not be able to meet their maker. Dying Declaration works on this maxim. The religious sanction behind their admissibility comes from the belief in the fact, that a sense of impending death produces in a man's mind the same feeling as that of a conscientious and virtuous man under oath-nemo morituruspraesumunturmentiri. Dying declarations is an important principle of Evidence Act. They are basically the statements made by the dying the person which tell about the causes and circumstances which led into his death.
Dying declarations are statements made by a dying person as to the injuries which
…show more content…
The Rule of Hearsay evidence tells that Hearsay Evidence is needed to be excluded as it is not trustworthy enough to rely decisions on them. Section 60 of Indian Evidence Act lies down that oral evidence must be direct. Section 32 is an exception to the general rule that hearsay evidence is not admissible.Dying declarations are admitted as an exception to the hearsay rule when they are made by declarants who are dead at the time of trial. They are rejected in the Court of Law as they do not fulfil the criterion given in the test of the admissible evidence. This is so because the statements given by such person cannot be verified or cross-examined in Court of Law. But the Dying Declaration is treated as an exception to such rule as the purpose of the Evidence will be tarnished if such statements will not be taken into consideration as the person is dead and cannot come to testify the statements and at the same time the statement made by the person cannot be …show more content…
It talks about the fact that the circumstances and causes given in the statement must be in proximity with the actual occurrence. In the series of judgements, the Court has also held that dying declaration can be the sole basis of the conviction of the accused. According to this section when the statement is made by a person as to the cause of his death, or any of the circumstances of the transaction which resulted in his death, in cases in which the cause of that person’s death comes into question. Such statements are relevant whether the person who made this was expecting death or
Furthermore, a hearsay statement is not excluded by the rule against hearsay even if the statement is not specifically covered by a hearsay exception in Rule 803 or 804 if the statement has equivalent circumstantial guarantees of trustworthiness; the statement is offered as evidence of a material fact; the statement is more probative on the point for which it is offered than any other evidence that the proponent can obtain through reasonable efforts; and that by admitting the
The living will protects a person’s predetermined choices relating to how their physician carries out their health care or end-of-life care in the event that they become unconscious or mentally incapable. Write your living
The 25th amendment has four important sections. One example out of the four sections is in the event of death,
I watched her endure such pain and witnessed the doctors give her such strong doses of medicine that made my grandma very unlike her usual vibrant self. All she prayed for was to peacefully pass. Why couldn’t we grant her that one last wish? C) Preview: “Death with Dignity” should be legalized as an option for terminally-ill patients because it alleviates the suffering one must endure, it’s freedom of choice, and it would prevent inhumane ways of suicides. (Transition: So let’s take a closer look on why there is such a need for “Death with Dignity.”
This section explains the duties of the physician that help the patient go through their choice to die with dignity. The duties involve diagnosing the patient, prescribing the medicine etc. The fourth section describes the immunities and liabilities to the involved party. This section serves as a buffer for the physician, institution or the healthcare providers from the law in case anyone claims homicide. In addition, section four also outlines the liabilities due to forgery, destruction of paperwork, claims by the government entity for costs and how one can get prosecuted.
Death with Dignity Everyone deserves to determine their time of death. Of course under the giving circumstances a terminal illness. This was the case of Brittany Maynard who at the age of 29 was diagnosed with brain cancer. Her cancer consisted of a partial craniotomy and a partial resection of her temporal lobe.
To provide more light on to the issues with the probation of assisted suicide, an intervenor called Dying with Dignity (DWD) takes the stance with the trial judge and believes in the right to have assisted deaths legalized within Canada. They wish to have it apart of the health care system, but emphasizes, just like Smith, that there must be safeguards that are meticulously enforced and reviewed. They have five submissions that expresses their thoughts and position within the decisions and thoughts behind the SCC Carter case: 1) they believe that the right to life also includes the right to die with dignity. Life should be interpreted broadly and that should also include how it ends. DWD argue that by placing a ban on assisted suicide determines
In order for a patient to receive the prescription for medication, a physician must declare the patient to be terminally ill, which means they have an incurable and irreversible illness, and they must have no more than six months to live. Also, a second doctor must agree with the first doctor. In addition, the terminally ill patient has to be mentally competent and able to administer the medication themself (“Threat” A12). These rules act as safeguards to ensure that the patient requesting aid in dying is making an informed decision and is acting voluntarily (Gopal
The possible legalization of euthanasia can cause a great disturbance in how people view life and death and the simplicity of how they would treat it. "There are many fairly severely handicapped people for whom a simple, affectionate life is possible." (Foot, p. 94) As demonstrated, the decision of terminating a person 's life is a very fragile and difficult one, emotionally and mentally. Nevertheless, it’s a choice we can make if it is passive euthanasia being expressed.
Lately, we have experienced a lot of situations as Mac and Huttmann situation. This problem is really controversial and, of course, everyone can relate to it. Barbara Huttmann is trying to show the audience that she is innocent by illustrating her struggle with Mac. Huttmann argues in this essay that the person should have the right to choose to live or die, only if they are suffering from a fatal illness. Huttmann illustrates her experiences with Mac in order to justify her act and convince people that mercy killing should be legal and she uses her compassionate tone and her vivid imagery to prove it.
However, there is hope of a peaceful death for these patients that exists in a controversial law being considered by many states throughout the country. It is known as the Death with Dignity Act. This law gives terminally ill patients the option of ending their own life in a painless manner at a time and place of their choosing by
The main ethical content of this film “You Don’t Know Jack” revolves around this argument. It is about mercy killing which can be supported on the basis that it puts an end to the suffering of terminally ill patient whose cure is certainly not possible. And it can be further backed by argument that a dead patient’s organs can give a new lease of life to many patients who can be cured. In this movie pathologist named Dr. Jack Kevorkian launches his work of death counseling activities to the terminally ill patients. He earns the support of Hemlock society.
“Death with dignity is a human right: to retain control until the very end and, if the quality of your life is too poor, to decide to end your suffering; the dignity comes from exercising the choice.” says Jason Barber, whose wife, Kathleen Barber, died in his arms. He had one question in mind when she died. What was he going to say if someone asked him how she died? Whether she went peacefully? He decided to tell people that his wife died in peace, without any pain or suffering.
In February 2002, a missing person case became a heart-melting homicide investigation. This was a test of morals and patients. A Quebec man was arrested and charged in the 2002 death of Adrienne McColl; the 21-year-old's body was found on February 17 in a Alberta field,16 years ago. Recently Gatineau police arrested 49-year-old Stéphane Parent, he is facing a second-degree murder charge in McColl's death. The facts that is evident to the general public in terms of this case are that Parent was fired from his job at the bar just days before McColl’s death, the bar owner reported that someone stole $8,400 from the restaurant.
The act of euthanasia, whether active or passive, is heavily obstructed in the medical field. Through medical ethics, the act of passive euthanasia is condoned by withholding treatment and thus, allowing the patient to die. Without any direct contact with the patient, the doctor is not considered as the cause of death. Thus, the medical field views passive euthanasia as of lesser and more permissible value in comparison to active euthanasia. In the statement made by the House of Delegates of the American Medical Association, they perceive this as contrary to mercy killing, as it is, the cessation of the employment of extraordinary means to prolong the life of the body when there is irrefutable evidence that biological death is imminent is the decision of the patient and/or his immediate family.