Bioethics in Faith and Practice, Volume 3, Number 1

Bioethics in Faith and Practice ⦁ 2017 ⦁ Volume 3 ⦁ Number 1 23 Bioethics in Faith and Practice vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 23-35. ISSN 2374-1597 © 2017, Norman Swazo, licensed under CC BY-NC-ND ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ ) A Request for Non-voluntary Euthanasia in Bangladesh: A Moral Assessment Norman K. Swazo North South University Introduction In January 2017 Mr. Tofazzal Hossain, living in the southwestern rural area of Meherpur Bangladesh, made an extraordinary request of local government authorities: to be given permission to euthanize his two sons and grandson. 1 This would be an entirely novel case of “legally sanctioned killing” 2 in Bangladesh were the request to be approved. There is no country now lawfully permitting non-voluntary active euthanasia, 3 except for the Groningen Protocol in the Netherlands that concerns terminally ill infants specifically, notwithstanding ongoing debate about the legality and morality of involuntary and non-voluntary active euthanasia. Indeed, a grant of legal permission would be contrary to Bangladesh’s signatory commitment under international law to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child , ratified by the government in 1990 , 4 as well as contrary to the Declaration of the Rights of the Child (1990), the latter expecting national governments to assure “special safeguards and care” as well as a right (under Principle 4) to “the benefits of social security” because of a child’s “physical and mental immaturity.” 5 It would also be contrary to the country’s constitutional recognition of Islam as a state religion, given that Islamic jurisprudence prohibits suicide and Islamic bioethics also is often presented as prohibiting euthanasia (some discussion on this factor follows later). From the father’s perspective, the argument in favor of active euthanasia was rather uncomplicated on the basis of facts: (1) His sons (Abdus Sabur, age 22, diagnosed at age 10, and Rahinul Islam, age 13, diagnosed at age 8) and grandson (Sourav, diagnosed in 2016, yet a child, age not specified) suffer from Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD); (2) His wife is mentally challenged and is unable to assist with their care ; 6 (3) A recently divorced daughter is now living in his home and requires his financial support; (4) His income is limited to his sale of fruit locally; (5) Either (a) he should have treatment provided them (by government health service) or (b) he should have them euthanized; (6) There is no public (government authorized and provided) medical care available to his wards; (7) It is not the case that he can afford their treatment. Therefore , his two sons and grandson should be euthanized, in which case the government commissioner in Meherpur should provide the requisite permission for these acts of active euthanasia. Mr. Hossain remarked further concerning his long-term burden: “I have taken care of them for years. I took them to hospitals in Bangladesh and India, I sold my shop to pay for their treatment but now I’m broke…The government should decide what it wants to do with them. They are suffering and have no