The debate on allowing euthanasia as a means to protect the dignity of patients in a vegetative state has crystallised into a key question before a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court. Should the law allow living wills? These are advance directives that people can lay down while being sound of mind, on whether they should continue to get life-sustaining treatment after they reach a stage of total incapacitation, that is, a vegetative state. The question is fraught with legal, moral and philosophical implications. The court will have to resolve the question whether the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution, which according to an earlier verdict does not include the right to die, is being voluntarily waived by a person giving such an advance directive. A living will, at the same time, may relieve the close family members and caregivers of a terminally ill patient of the moral burden of making a life-ending decision. Does a living will imply that the state has come to accept a patients autonomy and self-determination to the point of legalising a wish to die? Does it mean an abandonment of their obligation to preserve life? Under U.S. jurisdiction patient autonomy is paramount, many States have laws allowing advance directives, even the nomination of a ‘health care proxy’ who can decide on behalf of the patient. Should India follow? While reserving its verdict, the court has indicated that it may lay down comprehensive guidelines on operationalising the idea of living wills. The government has opposed the concept of an advance directive, arguing that it would be against public policy and the right to life.The government is rightly concerned that the idea may be misused and result in the neglect of the elderly.