Bissoy.com
Doctors Medicines MCQs Q&A

Principle: Euthanasia or mercy killing is not accepted as a defence in Indian law.
Factual Situation: X was suffering from HIV AIDS and was in a pathetic condition. The Doctors treating him told him that there was no hope. X decided to end his life and requested Z, his Doctor to kill him by injecting some poison into his body. Dr. Z agreed to his request and made preparations for executing the request of X. A nurse who happened to work in the same hospital was also a member of an NGO in the field of Human Rights. The nurse informed the matter to the NGO which in turn informed the police. The Police arrested Dr. Z while he was near X to give an injection to end the life of X.

Principle: Euthanasia or mercy killing is not accepted as a defence in Indian law.
Factual Situation: X was suffering from HIV AIDS and was in a pathetic condition. The Doctors treating him told him that there was no hope. X decided to end his life and requested Z, his Doctor to kill him by injecting some poison into his body. Dr. Z agreed to his request and made preparations for executing the request of X. A nurse who happened to work in the same hospital was also a member of an NGO in the field of Human Rights. The nurse informed the matter to the NGO which in turn informed the police. The Police arrested Dr. Z while he was near X to give an injection to end the life of X. Correct Answer Dr. Z is liable for attempting to kill X

Related Questions

With reference to ‘HIV and AIDS (Prevention and Control) Bill, 2017’, consider which of the following statements is/are true? 1. It seeks to prevent and control the spread of HIV and AIDS, prohibits discrimination against persons with HIV and AIDS. 2. It makes anti-retroviral therapy a legal right of HIV/AIDS patient. 3. It has provisions to safeguard the property rights of HIV positive people. 4. Every HIV infected person below the age of 18 years has the right to reside in a shared household and enjoy the facilities of the household.
Directions : Following question consists of a statement followed by three arguments I, II and III . You have to decide which of the arguments is a STRONG arguments and which is a WEAK Argument. Statement : Should mercy death be legalized, i.e., all those who are suffering from terminal diseases be allowed to end their lives if they so desire? Arguments : I. No. Nobody should be allowed to end his/her life at his/her will as this goes against the basic tenets of humanity. II. Yes. Patients undergoing terrible suffering and having absolutely no chance of recovery should be liberated from suffering through mercy death. III. No. Even mercy death is a sort of killing and killing can never be legalized.
Directions : Following question consists of a statement followed by three arguments I, II and III . You have to decide which of the arguments is a STRONG arguments and which is a WEAK Argument.

Statement : Should mercy death be legalized, i.e., all those who are suffering from terminal diseases be allowed to end their lives if they so desire?

Arguments :
I. No. Nobody should be allowed to end his/her life at his/her will as this goes against the basic tenets of humanity.
II. Yes. Patients undergoing terrible suffering and having absolutely no chance of recovery should be liberated from suffering through mercy death.
III. No. Even mercy death is a sort of killing and killing can never be legalized.
The question below consists of a set of labeled sentences. From the four options given, select the most probable sequence to form a coherent paragraph. A. She had the power to assign an inept scrub nurse to assist on a complicated kidney removal, or, if she liked the doctor, to send her most competent nurse to help him with a simple tonsillectomy. B. Nothing was overtly said or done, yet prejudice at work was way too subtle to pin down and Kat Hunter, being a black, woman doctor; was having a hard time. C. Margaret Spencer, was in charge of the hospital and doctors who did not recognize this, were in trouble as she knew which doctors were on drugs or addicted to alcohol, who were incompetent, who deserved her support to the extent of all registered student nurses, operating room nurses being under her. D. Amongst Spencer's many prejudices was an antipathy to woman doctors and to blacks.
Principle: Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who, at the time of doing it, is, by reason of intoxication, incapable of knowing the nature of the act, or that he is doing what is either wrong, or contrary to law, provided that the thing which intoxicated him was administered to him without his knowledge or against his will.
Factual Situation: Ram, Shyam and Vipin were friends. Vipin was in love with Anita and wanted to marry her. One day she told him that her marriage was fixed with a rich NRI and that he should not disturb her again in future. Vipin, who became depressed, told this to his friends. Ram suggested that they should go to a nearby bar and drink some Beer so that Vipin could relax. As Vipin was not habituated to drinks, initially he declined but later at the bar Ram told Vipin to take a little Whisky, which he did hesitatingly, After a while Vipin became totally intoxicated and started to say that Anita ditched him. Shyam, who was also drunk then said. " If you are so worried, go and kill her". A little while later all three friends parted company. Vipin went straight to Anita's hostel, called her out and shot her.
A (a 25 year old man) was B's (a 23 year old woman) neighbour. He fell in love with her and wanted to ask her to enter into a relationship with him. He sent her a number of text messages proclaiming his love for her. She did not respond to his overtures. On November 18, 2013, A went to B's house and told her that he was in love with her, and wanted to marry her. She told him that she was not interested and asked him to leave. A believed that B was only playing hard to get, and if he persisted, she would change her mind. On November 25, 2013, when B was returning home from her workplace, A met her again and proclaimed his love for her again. She again told him that she was not interested, and threatened to complain to the police. In spite of this, a week later, when B was leaving for work, she noticed that A was waiting outside her house, with a bouquet of flowers, and he tried to give her the flowers. B ignored him once again, and went to the police station to complain about A's acts. Under what Section of the Indian Penal Code should the police register the FIR (First Information Report)
In the following question below are given some statements followed by some conclusions. Taking the given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from commonly known facts, read all the conclusions and then decide which of the given conclusion logically follows the given statements. Statements: All patients are nurses. Some patients are doctors. No peon is a nurse. Conclusions: I. Some doctors are peons. II. No patient is peon. III. Some doctors are nurses. IV. Some doctors are not peons.
Principle: Nothing is an offence if done by a person who, at the time of doing it, by reason of unsoundness of mind is incapable of knowing the nature of the act or what he is doing is wrong or contrary to law.
Factual Situation: A, an author of macabre stories, was undergoing treatment for somnambulism. One night, he was given a high dose of sedative as he had become violent. There was a 'Do not disturb' board out side his room. Early morning, while A was still asleep, a nurse went to his room to check his condition. She started to note his pulse and thereafter to measure his BP. While she was fixing the equipment to measure the BP, A saw the nurse, but in a delirium he thought the nurse to be a vampire going to drink his blood. Suddenly in order to exorcise the ghost, A grabbed the BP apparatus and hit the 'ghost' on the head several times. The nurse collapsed and died subsequently.
In the question below are given two statements followed by two conclusions numbered I and II. You have to take the given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance with commonly known facts. Read all the conclusions and then decide which of the given conclusions logically follows from the given statements disregarding commonly known facts. Statements: I. Only a few Doctors are Engineers II. Some Doctors are not Nurse Conclusions: I. Some Nurse are Doctors II. Some Engineers are Nurse
Read the given statements and conclusions carefully. Assuming that the information given in the statements is true, even if it appears to be at variance with commonly known facts, decide which of the given conclusions logically follow(s) from the statements. Statements: No police officer is a doctor. Some doctors are specialists. All engineers are doctors. Conclusions: I. Some engineers are police officers. II. No engineer is a police officer. III. Some doctors are engineers.