Browsing by Author "Omipidan, Bashiru Adeniyi"

Now showing 1 - 5 of 5
  • Item
    DECISION MAKING TOWARDS THE END OF LIFE: EUTHANASIA AS A DANGEROUS OPTION
    (Department of Public Law, Faculty of Law, Kogi State University, 2014) Omipidan, Bashiru Adeniyi
    Life is said to be sacred and that no one reserve to take the life of another save in exceptional circumstances as may be laid down by the law It thus follow that man does not have the right to take the life he /she never contributed anything to. It is also a fact that ailment/ sickness is not the friend of anybody, but when it comes knocking at one’s door, reality must be faced and proper medication continued alongside prayers from loved ones until natural death comes. This has however taking a different shape as contemporary pro-right advocates are of the opinion that when a person approaches death or suffers from terminal illness, he/ she should either die or be assisted to do so instead of wallowing in pains and wasting tax-payers money. The contention of this group of people is that as soon as one can no longer pick flowers as usual, one’s quality of life has depreciated and euthanasia remains the only veritable option to enable such person (s) die a merciful and dignify death. Proponents of life on the other hand are strongly opposed to this idea. This, according to them, is because life belongs to the Almighty and that no matter the extent of a person’s sickness or suffering he/she should never embrace euthanasia but rather endure the pain and keep praying to God for recovery. It is in the light of the above, that this paper seeks to examine euthanasia as an option in taking a decision when one is ill or approaches the end of life. It would at the end show that palliative care is the best option to adopt as euthanasia is dangerous.
  • Item
    EUTHANASIA AND THE NIGERIAN CRIMINAL CODE LAWS; A NEED FOR REVIEW
    (Department of Public Law, Faculty of Law, University of Jos, 2013) Omipidan, Bashiru Adeniyi
    Euthanasia has remained the easiest way of either taking one s life or being assisted to do so. This culture of death is legal in some part of Europe, while same is gradually creeping into Africa. Besides the debate to legalize or de-legalize are equally on-going in several other parts of the world including Africa. However, one major controversy arisen however from the legalization of this concept is the lack or inability of some countries to make clearer laws on the issue. Lack of clearer laws in Montana, the United States of America; Britain, France and Italy, amongst others have caused avoidable deaths of innocent citizens. Apart from the above, same has pitched the executive and the legislatures against each other, thereby contributing to the pains of a suffering patient who may have to wait so long in order to know his or her fate. Nigeria is not an exception. This is because certain provisions of the country s criminal code laws, although makes suicide illegal, does not specifically provide for euthanasia, whereas the rule of professional ethics for medical doctors specifically outlawed all kinds of euthanasia. This dilemma in the face of the Supreme Court s decision in 2004, calls for a review. It is in the light of the above that this paper seeks to examine the concept of euthanasia and the provisions of the country s criminal code law that seem to cater for same with a view to suggesting possible areas of amendment.
  • Item
    EUTHANASIA: IN THE LIGHT OF YAR ADUA S DEATH; KILLING AND LETTING TO DIE DISTINGUISHED
    (Nigerian Institute of Advanced Legal Studues, 2013) Omipidan, Bashiru Adeniyi
    Today, the concept of euthanasia remains of the major contemporary issues across the globe. Upper most in the arguments amongst euthanasia proponents and opponents is the issue of killing (active euthanasia) and letting to die (passive euthanasia). While proponents, in drumming support for euthanasia, see no reason to differentiate between the two, opponents on the other hand are of the view that both words are different. The reason being that in the former the patient is killed, while in the latter case, the patient died from natural cause or ailment. Thus, this paper examines the arguments on both sides in the light of the death of Nigeria s former president, who had been on a life support machine for several months before dying a natural death. The essence is to show that differences exist between hastening someone s death, (Killing) and actually allowing the person to die naturally through the insertion and or withdrawal of life support machine (Letting to die), but without a discontinuance of artificial nutrition and hydration (food and drink).
  • Item
    PASSIVE EUTHANASIA IN THE LIGHT OF ARIEL SHARON S DEATH
    (Department of Public Law, Faculty of Law, Kogi State University, 2013) Omipidan, Bashiru Adeniyi
    Euthanasia, which means good or easy death, has continued to generate heated controversy in countries and jurisdiction where the concept has been legalized and in places where debates on whether to legalize or criminalize it are still on-going. While Proponents of the concept are of the view that it will be futile to continue to expend tax-payers money on an incurably ill person when it is clear he/she will not survive the illness, opponents on the other hand, believed strongly that illness of whatever form should never be a basis for taking one self s life. This paper therefore seeks to examine the death of Ariel Sharon the former Israeli prime minister who died on Saturday, 12 January 2014 after being in comma for eight (8) years. It will at the end show that, like Sharon, terminally ill person on life support machines should be catered for until natural death occurs.
  • Item
    THE PRACTICE OF EUTHANASIA UNDER THE DUTCH (NETHERLANDS) LAW AND THE SLIPERY SLOPE PRINCIPLE; A DANGER SIGNAL TO OTHER COUNTRIES
    (Department of Jurisprudence & International Law, Faculty of Law, Kogi State University, 2012) Omipidan, Bashiru Adeniyi
    Euthanasia, derived from the ancient Greek and Roman means eu easy or good and thanatos death. Thus, euthanasia from the above literally means mercy killing. In other words, persons whose illnesses, according to a team of medical personnel who have examined them, are incurable are either allowed to kill themselves (Active Euthanasia) or assisted to do so (Physician Assisted Suicide). The concept is presently legal in six countries, including the Netherland. What has however remained a great concern to stakeholders is the abuse that the concept is susceptible to as shall soon be seen under the Netherlands (Dutch) practice. The history of euthanasia and or assisted suicide will be incomplete without mentioning the Dutch (Netherlands). This is because; it is the first country in the whole world to legalize both euthanasia and assisted suicide. It is also note worthy to state that euthanasia and assisted suicide practice had been on in the country for close to twenty years before the formal legalization. Since then, it has continued to be reference point for most, if not all stake holders on the issue of euthanasia and assisted suicide. This reference points are however, like the arguments for and against legalization, divided into two. For those who are in support of legalization, they argue that the concept is working well under the Dutch (Netherlands) law, while opponents of legalization made reference to the same country as one of the major basis for opposing legalization. This is because, they describe euthanasia and assisted suicide practice under the Dutch (Netherlands) law, as one that is out of control. Hence, the practice is referred to as a slippery slope. It will also not be out of place to say that the flexible nature of the Dutch law was the enabling factor that made legalization possible in the country. The reason, as shall soon be seen, is that the judiciary and the Dutch medical association did not see anything wrong in the practice. Hence, they condone virtually all acts of euthanasia and assisted suicide even in the face of non compliance with the guidelines outlined for the practice. The courts could only impose monetary or probationary sanctions on erring doctors for an offence that carries the maximum penalty of death. In the same vein, the activities of the college of procurators ensured that prosecution of doctors, that participate in euthanasia and assisted suicide practice, is subject to their approval.