Draft norms on passive euthanasia can expose doctors to legal scrutiny

Q: How long will it take to read this news story?

The story "Draft norms on passive euthanasia can expose doctors to legal scrutiny" has 801 words across 22 sentences, which will take approximately 4 - 7 minutes for the average person to read.

Q: Which news outlet covered this story?

The story "Draft norms on passive euthanasia can expose doctors to legal scrutiny" was covered 5 hours ago by Business Standard, a news publisher based in India.

Q: How trustworthy is 'Business Standard' news outlet?

Business Standard is a fully independent (privately-owned) news outlet established in 1975 that covers mostly business and finance news. The outlet is headquartered in India and publishes an average of 313 news stories per day. It's most recent story was published 2 hours ago.

Q: What do people currently think of this news story?

The sentiment for this story is currently Neutral, indicating that people are not responding positively or negatively to this news.

Q: How do I report this news for inaccuracy?

You can report an inaccurate news publication to us via our contact page. Please also include the news #ID number and the URL to this story.<ul><li>News ID: #22795505</li><li>URL: https://beamstart.com/news/draft-norms-on-passive-euthanasia-17277112218522</li></ul>

Business Standard Logo Business Standard 5h ago

Draft norms on passive euthanasia can expose doctors to legal scrutiny - Business Standard

Quick Summary:

The Ministry of Health and Family Welfare last week released draft guidelines for the withdrawal of life support in terminally ill patients.

These conditions include if the individual has been declared brainstem dead according to the Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues (THOA) Act of 1994, or if there is a medical prognosis that the patient’s disease condition is advanced and not likely to benefit from aggressive therapeutic interventions.

The government’s new draft guidelines for passive euthanasia have not been well received by all clinicians, with experts stating that the move may put doctors under undue stress and expose them to legal scrutiny.