Beyond Autonomy Exploring Euthanasia and Abortion in Contemporary Urban Educated Bengalis

The 21st century has witnessed the rise of alternative voices regarding human dignity and worthwhile existence. Such advocacies of eudaimoma debate on issues of almost repugnant artificial prolongation of life over an autonomous and decorous existence; and also the contention of woman's identity as a tool of procreation versus her own will and self-direction. The present research has endeavoured to explore these apparently paradoxical issues which share a common underlying theme of human dignity and good living. Two 5 point scales for reviewing the attitude towards 'euthanasia' and 'abortion' were constructed following the initial directions of Thurstone and Chave (1929) and followed by relevant judgement by 11 experts. The sample consisted of 130 graduate, Hindu, urban/semi-urban individuals, aged between 21 to 40years; who were further categorized into two groups "Believers" and "Non-believers" based on the proposition of Bevacqua and Robinson-Kurpius (2008) that "it is not necessarily a particular religious affiliation that is of most importance, but instead any belief in a greater power might be the driving force behind a lower acceptance of one ending his or her life". The study reveals that non believers as well as women tend to have a more favourable attitude towards euthanasia as well as abortion. The results have been discussed keeping in mind that the contention of morality has contextual and feministic ramifications.