by Manawi Niringjuerae
Table of Contents
i. Islamic View of Human Being
ii. Islamic View on Ailments and its Concept of Sympathy
b. Consent of the Victim or His Guardian
Fatwas (Statements of Great Muslim Scholars):
Abstract
Undoubtedly, the Islamic notion of human sufferings, sickness and disasters strongly blames to end a human life based on the ground of mercy and human sympathy. But the developments of scientific in the field of medical science nowadays have changed the traditional position of declaring an ailing person as clinically dead. Now, the issue is how Islam views stopping the drugs or life-stretching devices from a person, who because of brain damage is totally paralised and shows no sign of life except that his heart-beat or breathing is sustained by a life-saving apparatus.
The purpose of this assignment is to find the extent to which right to life is given to an individual on a religious basis and to compare it with the man-mad law.
Introduction
Mercy killing or euthanasia is where the patients give their consent to end their lives. The physician on the request of the patient would withhold treatment or life supporting machines, inject lethal drugs or give electric shocks that would accelerate the death of the patient.
Active euthanasia by positive acts of injecting lethal drugs or giving electric shocks or such is not accepted by most whereas passive euthanasia by withholding treatment or life supporting apparatus has controversies in reception.
Involuntary euthanasia is conducted without the expressed consent of the individual. This is considered illegal in almost all countries.
Euthanasia under strict conditions has been legalised in few states but its acceptance is still a topic for debate among many under both religious and moral values.
Definition
The word mercy killing or Qatl-Al-Marḥamah is synonymous with the English terminology euthanasia.[1] It is a compound word consists of Qatl means killing and Marḥamah which is derived from the word raḥema and raḥma which means: to have mercy upon someone; have compassion; and be merciful. [2]
And the word “euthanasia” is a word derived from Greek eu and thanatos meaning ‘good death’ or ‘dying well’.[3] In a broader context it is defined as ‘ending the life of an individual in a painless manner.’[4]
Mercy killing (Qatl Al-Marḥamah) refers to the killing of a person who suffers from an irrecoverable illness or sickness that is terribly painful.[5]
However, it is broadly known that the word mercy killing is covered all forms of killing, which are included elderly person, a terribly disfigured baby, and a person in the state of permanent coma.[6]
Retrospectively, this form of aggression on human life has its precedent even among some primitive tribes where the elderly people who lost all their social and economic utility were made to climb a tree and hold fast onto its branches. Then they ordered some strong men to shake the tree strongly. If the man was able to hold on, he was declared worth living otherwise he was put to death. On other occasions he was taken to the desert and left to follow his destiny.[7]
At present with the great stride made in the field of medical science, and affliction of new ailments, it is not only the life of the elderly whose machine has lost function and no more deserves maintaining it is at stake but that of terribly disfigured infants at uterus, of those whose heart beat is sustained by life-saving devices, or suffering from AIDS or chronic cancer. It further becomes an issue of great concern when there is an apprehension that any simple ailment might be declared irrecoverable in order to dissect its vital organs for transplantation, and escape any legal consequences under the pretext of mercy killing.[8]
Mercy killing already has been decriminalized[9] in some secularist societies but its legalization is becoming debatable in others. This is normally carried out either by the close relatives against their most loved and dear ones,[10] or is done by the doctors.[11]
To address the issue from an Islamic perspective, this involves serious moral and legal questions such as Islamic view of mankind, the notion of Islamic compassion and sympathy, its view on diseases even if they are incurable, and ultimately its legal stand on the issue.
i. Islamic View of Human Being
Since we did not create ourselves we do not own our bodies. We are entrusted with them for care, nurture and safe keeping. God is the owner and giver of life and His rights in giving and in taking are not to be violated. Attempting to kill oneself is a crime in Islam as well as a grave sin. The Qur'an says:
Ÿwur (#þqè=çFø)s? öNä3|¡àÿRr& 4 ¨bÎ) ©!$# tb%x. öNä3Î/ $VJŠÏmu‘
"Do not kill (or destroy) yourselves, for verily Allah has been to you most Merciful" [12]
Islam, indeed views human beings with great respect, and Allah (swt) has made him to be the most noble among his creatures, as Allah says
ô‰s)s9ur $oYøB§x. ûÓÍ_t/ tPyŠ#uä öNßg»oYù=uHxqur ’Îû ÎhŽy9ø9$# Ìóst7ø9$#ur Nßg»oYø%y—u‘ur šÆÏiB ÏM»t7ÍhŠ©Ü9$# óOßg»uZù=žÒsùur 4’n?tã 9ŽÏVŸ2 ô`£JÏiB $oYø)n=yz WxŠÅÒøÿs?
We have honoured the sons of Adam; provided them with transport on land and sea; given them for sustenance things good and pure; and conferred on them special favours, above a great part of Our creation. [13]
And Allah has created him with the object of carrying out His vicegerency on earth. Thus He has declared his life to be absolutely inviolable. No matter if that life is of an aged, or ailing, or of a completely abnormal human being. This is very vivid from the Qur’anic verse,
Ÿwur (#qè=çGø)s? š[øÿ¨Z9$# ÓÉL©9$# tP§ym ª!$# žwÎ) Èd,ysø9$$Î/
"It is not lawful to take away a human life except with due process of law".[14] And the Prophet’s (pbuh) Ḥadith where he is reported to have declared "It is unlawful (ḥaram) to violate the sanctity of another’s life that Allah (swt) has declared to be inviolable."[15]
Commenting on the above Qur’anic provision, the leading authorities on the Qur’an hold that no human life can be destroyed save as provided by the Shari’ah. It is agreed that on the authorities from the Qur’anic provisions and the Prophetic traditions there are five instances where a person’s life can be terminated rightfully, namely for promiscuity, Apostasy, Ḥirabah (Highway Robbery) and intentional killing of a human being (culpable homicide) and rebellion.[16]
Thus to kill an ailing person based on sympathy is not among the list of instances which can be taken lawfully and thus is unlawful act (Ḥaram).
Moreover, in an Islamic view to push an ailing person into the jaws of death is not sympathy but amounts to an utter act of cruelty. Similarly Islamic view on diseases and calamities rests on a distinctly different premises.
ii. Islamic View on Ailments and its Concept of Sympathy
Firstly, according to Islamic worldview, ailments and infirmities in life are facts of life that must be met with patience and the adversities and calamities of any type are regarded as challenges to be faced with fortitude.[17]
Therefore, an afflicted person with ailments and other calamities is directed to regard his sufferings as a test from Allah (swt) and exercise patience to the effect. This is very clearly stated in the Qur’an where Allah (swt) states
$yg•ƒr'¯»tƒ z`ƒÏ%©!$# (#qãZtB#uä (#qãY‹ÏètGó™$# ÎŽö9¢Á9$$Î/ Ío4qn=¢Á9$#ur 4 ¨bÎ) ©!$# yìtB tûïÎŽÉ9»¢Á9$#
“O you who believe! seek help with patient perseverance and prayer; for Allah is with those who patiently persevere.” [18]
And yet in another place He declares patience in the face of adversities as a real act of righteousness.
Moreover the Qur’an, in order to in-still the fighting spirit in believers at facing the odds and adversities in life, narrates the story of Prophet Ayyub (pbuh) who was afflicted with most devastating skin disease and other calamities in terms of loss of property and his most dear and near members of his family, but still he was grateful to his Lord - where Allah (swt), described him as "How excellent in our service he was,[19] and "a veritable picture of patience for commemoration, for all who have for all who serve us "[20]
Among the scholars Ibn Kathīr says that according to an authentic Ḥadith, Prophet Ayyūb (pbuh) was suffering from a chronic skin ailment for 18 years. And his ailment was so horrible that all deserted him except his faithful and obedient wife. At times she used to work as a labourer and feed her husband. And at stages where she was refused employment on account of her being the spouse of Ayyūb (pbuh), she was made to sell his Pigtail on two occasions to provide a loaf of bread for her ailing husband.[21]
This narrative of the Qur’an contains a lot of wisdom for the serious-minded from among which two aspects are relevant for our discussion on mercy and sympathy as envisioned by Islam:[22]
i. Man has to exercise the utmost patience on the face of adversities in life, no matter how horrible they may be.
ii. Islamic notion of mercy dictates rendering services to a long-suffering ailing person.
Secondly, the Sunnah of the Prophet (pbuh) declares that ailments and calamities are blessings in disguise. This is evident from his consolement to a patient. "Have no fear, the ailment will prove purifying you from sin if Allah wills so."[23] This Ḥadith in itself not only enhances one’s belief and confidence for his salvation in the hereafter, it also has great psychological effect in relieving the pain suffered by the ailing person.
Thirdly, Islamic religion not only makes it incumbent upon the person related to the patient to take care of him, but it strongly urges its believers at large to pay service and spiritually support him by visiting him, and this is what mercy means in Islamic world view.[24]
For instance to render service to one’s parents is made next to serving Allah (swt). This is by virtue of the Qur’anic verse (Al-Isra’: 23-24) and many traditions from the Prophet (pbuh).
Again Qur’an makes it obligatory to extend a helping hand and treat fairly other blood relations, neighbours and humanity at large even if such assistance affects one’s economy and financial standing.[25]
For instance, the Qur’an obligates an affluent person to spend for the needy and the poor. This is in the form of paying the obligatory dues to the poor (Al-Zakāt), tithe (Al-Ushr) and other forms of benevolent acts of charity (Al-Ṣadaqāt). The Sunnah also, among other things, declares it a sin to hold back the sustenance of one whose living depends on him.
Finally, an ailing person is recommended to seek medical treatment through lawful means and never resort to medications which facilitates death. For instance the Prophet (pbuh) is reported to have said, "Allah (swt) descends diseases and for each ailment He facilitates cure, therefore you should seek treatment."[26] According to another report, "but never seek cure from malignant and harmful substance like poison."[27]
In a nutshell, Islam never approves ending someone’s life just on account of him becoming ill, handicapped, mentally retarded and paralised. Instead it strongly urges the afflicted person to exercise patience and highly exhorts his relatives and the community at large to help relieve his sufferings.
Therefore, Islamic law never excuses such killing and regard it considered as a crime for that matter.
iii. Criminal Liability
Islam does not only declare that the life of human being is absolutely sanctified. It also provides motive to protect and save one person’s life to salvaging the whole human race in terms of greatness of its reward. Thus, to violate it is a serious crime and to preserve it is the best form of righteous conduct in the eyes of the Shari’ah.
Therefore to kill someone deliberately by act or omission because he is suffering from an unbearable painful ailment or injury, or that he is too old, having lost all utilities and prays for death, or where his ailment is declared incurable, amounts to culpable homicide and is punishable by Qiṣās[28] unless pardoned by the next of kin of the victim. If such killing occurs unintentionally, he has to pay compensation (Diyah)[29] for the relatives of the victim.[30]
Nevertheless an accused indicted for this offence which normally is committed intentionally but with the motive of alleged genuine sympathy, among other things may put up the following defences:
a. Good Motive
According to Islamic Criminal law the motive which impels a person to intend the commission of wrongful act is irrelevant. As Abdul Qadir ‘Awdah says to the effect. "The Shari’ah from the outset has drawn a clear distinction between intending to commit a wrong and the motive which impels the criminal to do such wrong.[31] It does not attach any significance to motive in determining the guilt of the accused or its ensuing penalty.[32] Thus, it is not important to determine whether a killing is committed by a noble motive like for vengeance and protection of one’s dignity or it is committed with a base motive of killing for the sake of stealing.[33]
However, one may argue that in the Qur’an we read about the killing of a youth by Khidr who killed him with the view of preventing his rebellion against his parents. If it is the case then why the motive is not taken into account in removing the liability of the accused from this crime.[34]
This will not hold good because the incident in question belonged to a category of mysterious conduct which was a special gift by Allah (swt) to Khidr. It is held that it was nothing but a special implementation of Allah’s command, because the verse 65 of Al-Kahf states that Khidr was given special kind of knowledge from God.[35]
Therefore, the defence of good motive does not pardon the culprit from criminal liability on the issue.
b. Consent of the Victim or His Guardian
Mercy killing may occurred by the consent of the victim or his guardian. If the culprit, is a relative, contends that the deceased either orally or in writing has authorised him that in the event he becomes too old or irrecoverably ill, he should be put to death by a very peaceful and least painful means, or if he is a medical doctor, may contend that he has stopped providing medical services to his patient when it becomes obviously clear to him that he will not be cured. But such contention has been done away with the express consent from the relative or by virtue of the will (Waṣiyyah) from the deceased himself.[36]
Mercy killing in the aforesaid situations involves two distinct issues:
i. It occurs when a person, being in charge of caring for an ailing or elderly person, who by losing patience puts such life to death or refuses to attend to him anymore.[37]
ii. It is done by a medical officer by stopping to provide drugs or by administering some injection to a person whose illness with all probabilities is proven to be incurables.[38]
In the first case, it is generally held that consent of the deceased does not excuse the offender from the liability. Since human life is of the nature of a thing upon which man has no transferable right. That is why suicide is a grave and sinful act and is prohibited in Islam.[39] Therefore, if someone requires another person to end his life is considered as a great sin.
However, there is some discussion among Muslim jurists on the issue when they address the right of pardon by the relatives of the victim in advance.
In case of consent by the victim the jurists (fuqaha’) advance the following views.
The Ḥanafies view the pardon by the victim before his death as consent which in turn is a mitigating ground for dropping Qiṣās.[40] This is further justified that such consent is a sufficient ground to constitute doubt which is the remover of Qiṣās punishment as a principle in criminal law.[41] However, as to whether diyah is due or not Hanafies are divided.[42]
Al-Dassuqi, representing to Maliki school stand says "if a person before infliction of a deadly blow says to another, "I exonerate you from liability if you kill me", it has no any validity since he has exempted the accused before such right is due to him".[43] But according to a famous opinion of the school, diyah would be due.[44]
Al-Sharbini, of the Shafi’e holds that, "Qiṣās is dropped because of doubt created by the victim’s consent, but diyah is due."[45]
Al-Baḥuti of Ḥanbali School says, "if an injured person pardons his assailant from the consequent death which resulted from that injury, the offender is not under any liability whatsoever, because the victim has rightfully forgiven him after the effective cause was present at his body."[46]
From the above opinions given by the jurists from the four Sunni schools, it is clearly shown that some like Malikis and Ḥanafies (analogically) uphold the view that man has no alienable right over his life thus his pardon made in advance (Al-Afw ma taqaddam) does not exonerate the culprit from the liability.[47] Others like Ḥanabilah and some Shafi’es hold to the contrary, while the majority holds a middle-course approach on the golden rule that where there is difficulty in applying the Shari’ah ruling on the point involving Qiṣās cases and doubt emerges, the original penalty is dropped and an alternative penalty becomes due.[48]
c. Duress (Al-Ikrāh)
The culprit who happens to be the spouse or other (closely) related persons to the deceased may contend that he killed the victim because he was under great pressure and mental distress because of his long period of attending him or in legal terminology he did it under incorporeal duress (Al-Ikrāh al-Ma’nawi).[49]
This is agreed by the majority of Muslim jurists that in crime of killing, duress even if it is to the extent of physical threat to one’s own life and limb (Al-Ikrāh Mulji’), does not exonerate him from the liability. Mental distress which is of the type of non-physical threat has no significance to the issue.[50]
Indeed, mercy killing is a serious crime, and no one is allowed to resort to it under any pretext. It is punishable in the same way as a crime of deliberate homicide.
And no plea of mercy, duress and consent can justify and remove its criminality. However, the challenges of the tremendous advancement in the field of medical facilities, whereby a person who is the state of a permanent coma can have his heart-beat or breathing sustained for so long, finds its answer on the opinion which maintains that the liability of removing such device is mitigated by consent of the legal heirs.[51] Nevertheless, it still remains to be subject of dispute because; to make such person to linger on to breathing is analogous to sustaining his life with food or drink, and rejection of the view by Ḥanbalis and Shafies of the legality of the consent on ground of their non-acceptability of institution (juristic preference).[52]
Fatwas (Statements of Great Muslim Scholars):
Saudi Arabia’s grand mufti Shaikh Abdul Aziz bin Abdullah bin Bāz has ruled that mercy killing or Euthanasia (removing life supporting apparatuses keeping alive a person inflicted with an incurable disease or under coma) is un-Islamic. Sheikh Bin Bāz said it was against Shari’a to decide the death of a person before he is actually dead.[53] The popular Egyptian scholar Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaraḍawi, recently issued a fatwa, or religious ruling, equating euthanasia with murder, but allowing the withholding of treatment that is deemed useless.[54] Al-Qaraḍawi issued a fatwa that allows physicians to discontinue the life equipment used for the person who is clinically dead or whose brain stem is dead. Al-Qaraḍawi stressed that the fatwa is based on medical researches as well as on the Shari’a. [55]
Ayatollah Khamanei leader of Islamic Republic of Iran, as a Shiite Muslim scholar, also has issued a fatwa considering euthanasia “in all forms” forbidden (haram)[56] Ayatollah Nuri Ḥamadani another Shiite Ayatollah also regards all forms of euthanasia as ḥarām.[57]
According to Ali jumåh, Grand Mufti of Egypt,[58] “Islamic law does permit the removal of the medical equipment utilized to keep a person alive when it is no longer hoped that such a person will be cured and no progress is being made in the attempt to restore their health—due to being “clinically dead”— only when physicians advise to do so. If, however, the equipment has another purpose, like the removal of fluid to improve respiratory health, it is not permissible to deactivate them. This is different, though, from what is called “euthanasia” wherein the sick person requests from the physician to end their life or when the physician decides that unilaterally due to some handicap that will afflict the sick or because of severe pain. Such decisions are unequivocally unlawful because the sick is still living and their life is not dependent upon the life preserving equipment. Rather, the only concern is that the sick or the physician desires to put an end to life due to the excessive pain experienced by the sick. To end life in such an instance will be considered homicide and a murder of a soul that God has declared sacred.”
Euthanasia in Different Legislations
1. United Kingdom
In England and Wales, even though suicide itself is no longer a crime, the Suicide Act 1961 makes it illegal to “aid, abet, counsel or procure the suicide of another” and sets a maximum prison sentence of 14 years.[59] Thus Active Euthanasia or assisted suicide is not allowed as whatever the case may be active euthanasia under English Law is equal to murder.[60]
Conversely, the study of case law shows that when specific requirements are met with, passive euthanasia is allowed.
A competent patient may refuse treatment including life sustaining treatment. In the case of Re T (Adult: Refusal of Treatment),[61] the patient whose mother was a member of the Jehovah’s Witnesses refused blood transfer after delivery of a stillborn child following an accident. The father of the child applied for a declaration that it would be lawful to administer the blood transfer even without her approval. The declaration was granted and the decision was appealed. On appeal it was held that “an adult whose mental capacity is unimpaired has the right to decide for herself whether she will or will not receive medical or surgical treatment, even in the circumstances where she is likely or even certain to die in the absence of the treatment.”
It is now an established principle that a competent patient may refuse treatment even to the extent that such refusal may lead to death. The issue now arises regarding patients of vegetative states with no hopes of recovery. The question whether the doctors are under a duty to sustain and prolong the life of such patients were dealt in the case of Airedale NHS Trust v Bland [1993] AC 789. In this case a distinction was drawn between the concept of causing death and letting to die. Causing death which is active euthanasia will not release a person from liability whereas letting to die which may be termed as passive euthanasia would incur no liability provided that the patient is in a permanent vegetative state and ultimately would die. Letting to die would be done by withdrawing life supporting machines and other contraptions.
2. Australia
Suicide is no longer a crime in the Australian jurisdictions. However, assisting an individual to end his or her own life is a crime in Australia.[62] The Rights of the Terminally Ill Act, which permitted euthanasia initially passed in the Northern Territory of Australia in 1995 was later overruled by a 1996 law.
The Australian Law on euthanasia or assisted dying is similar to the law of UK as the Australian Courts have received the principles laid down in the common law cases such as Airedale NHS Trust v Bland and Re T (Adult: Refusal of Treatment).
The most recent ruling in Australia is where the Supreme Court of Western Australia in August 2009 ruled that Christian Rossiter was entitled to decide if he wanted to continue medical care. He was paralysed, a condition known as quadriplegia, which is a paralysis caused by illness or injury to a human that results in the partial or total loss of use of all of their limbs and torso. It was also stated by the court that the carers of Rossiter will not be held criminally responsible for following his instructions.[63]
3. United States
Euthanasia is illegal in most of the U.S. However, in the States of Washington and Oregon it has been legalised. In Texas, it is allowed to a limited extent.[64]
Texas Advance Directives Act or Texas Futile Care Law passed in 1999 authorises hospitals and physicians to withdraw life support measures such as mechanical respiration, from those patients who are terminally ill such that the treatment becomes both futile and inappropriate.[65] The most controversial provision of this Act is where the health care institution is given the authority to discontinue the life sustaining treatment against the consent of the patient or the family.[66]
Under the Oregon Death with Dignity Act which was approved in 1994, a patient who has been diagnosed with a terminal illness that will kill the patient within six months may request for a prescription for a lethal dose of medication from his or her physician.
The Washington Death with Dignity Act or Initiative Measure No. 1000 similar to the Oregon Act also allows prescription of medication to terminate life on the written request of the patient who will then self administer the injection of the lethal medication. While there are stipulations restricting the prescription, this is clearly a situation where active euthanasia is permitted.
While the law of Texas permits a form of passive euthanasia, active euthanasia or assisted suicide is legal in both in Oregon and Washington despite the resistance to the sanction.
Euthanasia: A Comparison
Passive euthanasia is allowed under the Islamic Law according to the views of the Muslim Scholars where any treatment with no result can be stopped or withheld. Additionally, active euthanasia or killing a person through positive means such as lethal injections or electric shocks is not permitted and is equated to intentional homicide.
The law on euthanasia is in UK and Australia is basically along the same lines as the Islamic view on euthanasia where active euthanasia whether it is voluntary or involuntary is not lawful but the withdrawal of life supporting systems that prolongs the life of a patient is held to incur no liability under strict conditions where the patient is known to be in a permanent vegetative state with no probability of recovering. Furthermore refusal of treatment is a given right to any individual, even if it will probably result in the death of the person.
The law of Texas of US provides that the withdrawal of life supporting systems of a patient is permissible with or without the consent of the patient or the family provided the patient has no chance of recovery. The right to seek treatment is fundamental to the right to life. Hence, this may be a violation of right to life.
The Acts legalising euthanasia in the US states of Washington and Oregon permits the physician to prescribe a lethal dose of injection on the request of the patient which will be administered by the patient on his own to end his life. Even though the physician does not commit the act to end the life, still the prescription of the medication will not be permitted under the Islamic Law as this is assistance to suicide and suicide is completely prohibited in Islam whereas suicide is not a crime in US legislation.
Conclusion
Islamic jurisprudence, based on a convincing interpretation of the holy Qur’ān, does not recognize a person’s right to die voluntarily. The Islamic arguments against mercy killing can be summarized in two main reasons: First: Life is sacred, and mercy killing and suicide are not included among the reasons allowed for killing in Islam. And second: Allah decides how long each of us will live and the moment of death, ajal, is under the control of Allah and the human has no say in this matter; the human cannot and should not attempt to hasten or delay the ajal. The prohibition on life applies equally well whether for self, suicide, or others, homicide or genocide. The concepts of autonomy, freedom and individual choice does not apply here for these two reasons: a. life does not belong to the human; and b. taking life will cause harm to the family and society in general. An individual's freedom of choice is constrained by the harm it causes to others.
As a conclusion we can say that the Islamic position is that life belongs to Allah. It is He who gives and takes away life. No human can give or take it. Muslims are against euthanasia. They believe that all human life is sacred because it is given by Allah, and that Allah chooses how long each person will live. Human beings should not interfere in this.
There are two instances, however, that could be interpreted as passive assistance in allowing a terminally ill patient to die and would be permissible by Islamic law: Administering analgesic agents that might shorten the patient’s life, with the purpose of relieving the physical pain or mental distress, and withdrawing a futile treatment in the basis of informed consent (of the immediate family members who act on the professional advice of the physicians in charge of the case) allowing death to take its natural course. If a patient is medically presumed dead through what is known as brain death, switching off the life support may be permissible, with due consultation and care.
Bibliography
Abdul Wahhab Ḥawmad. (1983). Dirasāt Mu ammaqah Fil-Fiqh Al-Jinā’i Al-Muqāran. Kuwait: Matbu’at Jami at-e- Kuwait.
Aḥmed Mawafi. (1965). Min Al-Fiqh Al-Jinā’i Al-Muqārin Bain Al-Shari’ah Wal-Qanūn. Al-Qāhirah: A.M. Al-A’la Lil-Shu’un Al-Islami.
Al-Qaraḍawi Y. (2006). Question and answer about Euthanasia. (Accessed on 1-7- 2010).
http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?cid=1119503544774&pagename=IslamOnline-English-Ask_Scholar/FatwaE/FatwaEAskTheScholar.
Abdul Qadir ‘Awdah. (2005). Al-Tashrī Al-Jinā’i Al-Islāmī. Al-Qāhirah: Dār Al-Turāth.
Brazier.M. and Cave.E. (2007). Medicine, Patients and the Law. London: LexisNexis/Butterworths.
Devereux. J.A. (2007). Australian Medical Law. Oxon: Routledge-Cavendish.
Isma’il Ibn Kathīr. (1989). Qisās Al-Anbīa’. Al-Qāhirah: Al-Maktāb Al-Thaqāfi.
Khamenei A. Islamic medical Jurisprudence. <http://www.basijmed.com/esteftaat/ahkam_kh/detail.asp> ?iNews=116&iType=24. (Accessed on 1-1- 2007).
Moḥammad Ibn Ismail Al-Bukhāri. (1981). Ṣahīh Al-Bukhāri. Bayrūt: Dār Al-Fikr.
Moḥammed Ibn Ali Al-Shawkāni. (1997). Nail Al-Awṭār-Sharh Muntaqi Al-Akhyār. Saudi Arabia: Riasatoedarat Al-Bahuth Al-’Ilmiyah wal-Ifta.
Moḥammed Al-Khatib Al-Sharbini. (1998). Mughni Al-Muḥtāj. Bayrūt: Dār Al-Fikr.
Mansūr Ibn Yunus A-Bahuti. (1982). Kashshaf Al-Qina Ala Matu Al-Iqnā. Bayrūt: Dār Al-Fikr.
Noori Ḥamadani H. Islamic Medical Jurisprudence. http://www.noorihamedani.com/noori/home.asp?idnumber=114&Languageurl=1&Pageurlnumber=403&location=none&zone=0&srch. (Accessed on 1-7- 2010).
Oxford Wordpower. (2003). UK: Oxford University Press.
Syed Sikandar Shah, “Islamic Criminal Law” Mercy Killing in Islam. Malaysia, [1996]3 CLJ xciii,
Shams Al-Din Moḥammed A’rafah Al-Dassuqi. (1994). Ḥashiyah Al-Dassuqi A’la Sharḥ Kabir. Al-Qāhirah: Dar Al-Ihya Al-Kutub Al-Arabi.
Web master. Essays Tagged: word euthanasia. http://www.writework.com/tag/word-euthanasia. (accessed 27 October, 2010) .
[1] Oxford Wordpower, (Oxford University Press UK 2003), p. 257.
[2] Abdul Wahhab Ḥawmad, Dirasāt Mu ammaqah Fil-Fiqh Al-Jinā’i Al-Muqāran, (Matbu’at Jami at-e-Kuwait, 1983), pp. 301-308.
[3] See, Web master, “Essays Tagged: word euthanasia”, < http://www.writework.com/tag/word-euthanasia> (accessed 27 October, 2010).
[4] Ibid.
[5] Abdul Wahhab Ḥawmad, Dirasāt Mu ammaqah Fil-Fiqh Al-Jinā’i Al-Muqāran, (Matbu’at Jami at-e-Kuwait, 1983), pp. 301-308.
[6] Syed Sikandar Shah, “Mercy Killing in Islam”, Islamic Criminal Law,
[7] Abdul Wahhab Ḥawmad, Dirasāt Mu ammaqah Fil-Fiqh Al-Jinā’i Al-Muqāran, (Matbu’at Jami at-e-Kuwait, 1983), pp. 301-308.
[8] Syed Sikandar Shah, “Mercy Killing in Islam”, Islamic Criminal Law,
[9] The meaning of decriminalization is that in many instances individuals especially the spouse commits this against his partner merely because that the former is partially paralyzed or is suffering from other chronical diseases like cancer. When he is charged, he simply contends, "I did it out of sympathy," and gets acquitted. See for cases Abdul Wahhab Ḥawmad, Dirasāt Mu ammaqah Fil-Fiqh Al-Jinā’i Al-Muqāran, pp. 305-313.
[10] For instance in 1949, a female student by the name of Paigat Carol Ann killed her father who was suffering from cancer, and got acquitted. See Ibid, p. 306.
[11] For instance Dr. Mair an English medical doctor in 1975, said, "a lot of medical practitioners are resorting to euthanasia like me surreptitiously but now we talk about it loudly," see Ibid, p. 313.
[12] Al-Qur’an, 4:29.
[13] Al-Qur’an, 17:70.
[14] Al-Qur’an, 6:151.
[15]Moḥammad Ibn Ismail Al-Bukhāri, Ṣahīh Al-Bukhāri, (Bayrūt, Dār Al-Fikr, 1981), vol. 8, p. 148.
[16]Syed Sikandar Shah, “Mercy Killing in Islam”, Islamic Criminal Law,
[17] Ibid.
[18] Al-Qur’an, 2:153.
[19] Al-Qur’an, 38:41-44.
[20] Al-Qur’an, 21:83-84.
[21] Isma’il Ibn Kathīr, Qiṣās Al-Anbīa’, (Al-Qāhirah, Al-Maktāb Al-Thaqāfi, 1989), pp. 256-262.
[22] Syed Sikandar Shah, “Mercy Killing in Islam”, Islamic Criminal Law,
[23] Yahya Ibn Sharaf Al-Nawawi, "Riāḍ Al-Sāliḥīn," ed. Abd Aziz Riban and Ahmad Yusuf (Al-Daqaq, 1991), p 302.
[24] Syed Sikandar Shah, “Mercy Killing in Islam”, Islamic Criminal Law,
[25] Ibid.
[26] See, Mohammed Ibn Ali Al-Shawkāni, Nail Al-Awṭār-Sharh Muntaqi Al-Akhyār, (Riasatoedarat Al-Bahuth Al-’Ilmiyah wal-Ifta, Saudi Arabia, n.d.), vol. 9, p. 93.
[27] It is narrated by Abi Hurairah, see Ibid.
[28] Qiṣās is the original punishment for deliberate homicide and it can be compounded or remitted for diyah. Its authority is by virtue of the Qur’anic Ayah, 2:178.
[29] Diyah designates the amount of compensation given to the heirs of the victim for wilful killing if forgiven, and as original penalty for killing by mistake or negligence. The authority for this is by virtue of the Qur’anic verse (Al-Nisa: 92).
[30] Syed Sikandar Shah, “Mercy Killing in Islam”, Islamic Criminal Law,
[31] Abdul Qadir ‘Awdah, Al-Tashrī Al-Jinā’i Al-Islāmī, (Al-Qāhirah: Dār Al-Turāth, 2005) vol. 1, p. 387.
[32] Ibid.
[33] Ibid.
[34] Al-Qur’an, 18:65-82.
[35] Ahmed Mawafi, Min Al-Fiqh Al-Jinā’i Al-Muqārin Bain Al-Shari’ah Wal-Qanūn, (Al-Qāhirah, A.M. Al-A’la Lil-Shu’un Al-islami, 1965), pp. 220-223.
[36] Syed Sikandar Shah, “Mercy Killing in Islam”, Islamic Criminal Law,
[37] Ibid.
[38] Ibid.
[39] Suicide is explicitly prohibited by the Al-Qur’an, Al-Nisa, 4:29.
[40] Abdul Qadir ‘Awdah, Al-Tashrī Al-Jinā’i Al-Islāmī, (Al-Qāhirah: Dār Al-Turāth, 2005), vol. 1, p. 381.
[41] Ibid.
[42] Ibid.
[43] Shams Al-Din Moḥammed A’rafah Al-Dassuqi, Ḥashiyah Al-Dassuqi A’la Sharh Kabir, (Al-Qāhirah: Dar Al-Ihya Al-Kutub Al-Arabi, 1994), vol. 4, p. 240.
[44] Ibid.
[45] Moḥammed Al-Khatib Al-Sharbini, "Mughni Al-Muhtāj", (Bayrūt: Dār Al-Fikr, 1998.) vol. 4, p. 50.
[46] Mansūr Ibn Yunus A-Baḥuti, Kashshaf Al-Qina Ala Matu Al-Iqnā, (Bayrūt: Dār Al-Fikr, 1982). vol. 5, p. 546. See also, Abdul Qadir ‘Awdah, Al-Tashrī Al-Jinā’i Al-Islāmī, p. 382.
[47] Syed Sikandar Shah, “Mercy Killing in Islam”, Islamic Criminal Law,
[48] Ibid.
[49] According to Al-Sarakhsi and Bazdawi, any form of threat which is not material or physical is called Al-Ikrah Al-Adabi or Ma’nawi. For instance to threaten someone to do some act by imprisoning his spouse amounts to Al-Ikrah Al-Ma’nawi.
[50] Ibid.
[51] Syed Sikandar Shah, “Mercy Killing in Islam”, Islamic Criminal Law,
[52] Ibid.
[53] Islamic Voice news site.
[54] Al-Qaraḍawi Y. Question and answer about Euthanasia.In: Islamonline site.
Ask_Scholar/FatwaE/FatwaEAskTheScholar> (Accessed on 1-7- 2010).
[55] http://www.arabwestreport.info/node/16252, (Accessed on 16-10-2010).
[56] Khamenei A. Islamic medical Jurisprudence. In: Official website of Ayatollah Khamenei.
<http://www.basijmed.com/esteftaat/ahkam_kh/detail.asp ?iNews=116&iType=24> (Accessed on 1-1- 2007).
[57] Noori Hamadani H. Islamic Medical Jurisprudence. InOfficial website of Ayatollah Noori Hamadani.
http://www.noorihamedani.com/noori/home.asp?idnumber=114&Languageurl=1&Pageurlnumber=403&location=none&zone=0&srch. (Accessed on 1-7- 2010).
[58] See, <http://www.aligomaa.net/fatwacollection.html> (Accessed on 16-10-2010).
[59] Section 2(1).
[60] Brazier. M. and Cave. E. Medicine, Patients and the Law, (London :LexisNexis/Butterworths, 2007), p. 488.
[61] [1993] Fam 95.
[62] Devereux. J.A. Australian Medical Law. (Abingdon, Oxon; Routledge-Cavendish, 2007), p. 725.
[63] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euthanasia_in_Australia, (Accessed on 19 August 2010)
[64] Chapter 166 of the Texas Advance Directives Act 1999
[65] Ibid.
[66] Ibid.
ไม่มีความคิดเห็น:
แสดงความคิดเห็น