EUTHANASIA IN NIGERIA: A LEGAL, ETHICAL OR MORAL RELEVANCE?

Abstract

The concept of euthanasia has remained controversial in Nigeria and other countries owing primarily to the legal, ethical and moral dilemma associated with it.   The practice of euthanasia under the Nigerian law is seen as murder or at best manslaughter. There has been a tilt by the court towards a patient’s right to informed consent as well as patients’ autonomy. The question is, what is the quality of consent extracted from a patient who is going through excruciating pain? Is the patients’ right to self-determination or autonomy absolute?   The relevancy of euthanasia has not been fully addressed in view of the contents of the Hippocratic Oath and the constitutional guaranteed rights to liberty, privacy, religion, thought and conscience. This paper discusses the legal, ethical and moral relevance of euthanasia in Nigeria. This is achieved through a critical analysis of the statutes, case laws and scholarly works on the subject. The conclusion drawn is that the right of euthanasia in whatever form, does not have any relevance in Nigeria. Apart from being a taboo in Nigeria, there is no mechanism in place for the rigorous medical evaluation required to ascertain the quality of consent expressed. The high tendency for abuse and fear of extinction of moral values are some of the limiting factors.  The paper recommends significant investment in care homes for the suffering in Nigeria, good governance that has the welfare of the poor in focus.  In a helpless situation, a proper evaluation of actual intent of the sick should be carried out to weigh the quality of consent and prevent abuse.