Graeme Catto, former president of the UK General Medical Council, has called for parliament to legalise assisted dying "in some shape or form" for a small number of people experiencing unbearable suffering. Professor Catto said he was expressing his personal view and not that of the GMC, which as the United Kingdom’s regulator for doctors had to support the law of the land and therefore could have no position on assisted suicide. Speaking at a conference on the ethics of assisted suicide at the Royal Society of Medicine on 30 June, he said, "I genuinely believe that if there were a change in the law it would pose no insurmountable problems for doctors."
A man with "locked-in syndrome" has begun legal action, asking the director of public prosecutions to clarify the law on so-called mercy killing. Tony Nicklinson, 56, wants his wife to be allowed to help him die without the risk of being prosecuted for murder. Mr Nicklinson, of Chippenham, Wiltshire, communicates by blinking or nodding his head at letters on a board. His lawyers say he is "fed up with life" and does not wish to spend the next 20 years in this condition. According to his legal team, his only lawful means of ending his life is by starvation - refusing food and liquids. His wife Jane says she is prepared to inject him with a lethal dose of drugs, but this would leave her liable to be charged with murder.
Fergus Walsh | 20:30 UK time, Monday, 19 July 2010 The case of Tony Nicklinson will re-open the debate on assisted dying and so-called "mercy killing". He has locked-in syndrome, following a stroke. Unable to talk, he communicates by blinking or nodding his head. He also has a specially adapted computer with a push-button control. Mr Nicklinson wants his wife to be allowed to inject him with a lethal drugs dose without the fear of her being prosecuted for murder or manslaughter. As the law stands, that seems a vain hope because actively taking a life, even with consent, has always been treated as a crime, leading to a jury trial.
Marlisa Tiedemann Dominique Valiquet Law and Government Division Revised 17 July 2008 PRB 07-03E PARLIAMENTARY INFORMATION AND RESEARCH SERVICE SERVICE D’INFORMATION ET DE RECHERCHEPARLEMENTAIRES
The Society for Old Age Rational Suicide was established in Brighton and Hove, by several right-to-die activists and humanists, in 2009. Presently, the main objective of SOARS is to begin a campaign to get the law eventually changed in the UK so that very elderly, mentally competent individuals, who are suffering unbearably from various health problems (although none of them is “terminal”) are allowed to receive a doctor’s assistance to die, if this is their persistent choice. Surely the decision to decide, at an advanced age, that enough is enough and, avoiding further suffering, to have a dignified death is the ultimate human right for a very elderly person. Although there is much public support for this to become lawful in the UK, it is unlikely that Parliament (either at Westminster or in Edinburgh) will change the law, to help those who are terminally ill, for at least five to ten years.
Elderly people should be allowed to end their lives with the help of a doctor even if they are not terminally ill, according to a new campaign group that claims to have widespread support. The Society for Old Age Rational Suicide, led by a former GP known as “Dr Death”, says that pensioners should have the human right to declare “enough is enough” and die with dignity.
A public policy think tank, which aims to promote “rational, evidence-based and measured debate” on the subject of assisted dying, has been launched by two members of the House of Lords. Lord Alex Carlile and Baroness Ilora Finlay, co-chairs of Living and Dying Well, have both fervently opposed any change in the law on this issue. Their new organisation is neither “neutral” nor “a campaigning pressure group,” instead, they want to present “hard evidence” to parliament and the public in an objective and informative manner.
This End of life guidance covers three main issues: contemporaneous and advance refusal of treatment; withholding and withdrawing life-prolonging medical treatment; assisted dying - euthanasia and assisted suicide.
The extent to which people should be able to have some control over how and when they die is a hugely contentious issue. In 2006, the House of Lords blocked Lord Joffe’s bill that would have allowed terminally ill people in certain circumstance to be helped to die. Yet there is little robust and impartial evidence about the attitudes of people in Britain towards these issues. To find out more about what people think, the 2005 British Social Attitudes survey included a set of questions about attitudes to assisted dying and end of life care.
Penney Lewis, a law professor at King's College London, said the U.K. had become more receptive to allowing assisted suicide in recent years but not euthanasia. "Granting Nicklinson a hearing does not mean euthanasia will be allowed, but it is a big step," she said. Legalizing euthanasia in the Netherlands began in a similar fashion, with doctors in court cases employing arguments much like those of Nicklinson's legal team, Lewis said.
According to a BBC report, Tony Nicklinson, 58, from Melksham, Wiltshire, has “locked-in syndrome” after a stroke in 2005 and “is unable to carry out his own suicide.” “He is seeking legal protection for any doctor who helps him end his life.” In fact, it is not quite correct that Tony Nicklinson “is unable to carry out his own suicide.” He could at present refuse to eat food or drink fluids. Hunger strikers do this for political reasons. He could do it for personal reasons. People should not be force fed against their own autonomous wishes.
The total number of deaths studied was 11,704 of which 1517 involved continuous deep sedation. In Dutch hospitals, CDS was significantly less often provided (11%) compared with hospitals in Flanders (20%) and U.K. (17%). In U.K. home settings, CDS was more common (19%) than in Flanders (10%) or NL (8%). In NL in both settings, CDS more often involved benzodiazepines and lasted less than 24 hours. Physicians in Flanders combined CDS with a decision to provide physician-assisted death more often. Overall, men, younger patients, and patients with malignancies were more likely to receive CDS, although this was not always significant within each country. Conclusion Differences in the prevalence of continuous deep sedation appear to reflect complex legal, cultural, and organizational factors more than differences in patients’ characteristics or clinical profiles. Further
The focus of this article is upon compassionate killings, that is, criminal cases where a parent/spouse has killed or assisted to die a child/spouse who was suffering from severe disabilities, debilitating injury, chronic or terminal illness. We argue that the partial defence of diminished responsibility, while appropriate for some cases, fails to acknowledge the compassionate and relational nature of these acts and thus fails to identify the quality of the harm committed. We also argue that the general defences of duress of circumstances and necessity, even if they were to be become available, are inappropriate. Developing the concept of ‘compassion’, which is a consideration in relation to prosecution for assisted suicide, we argue for the introduction of a partial defence of ‘compassionate killing’ which would reduce the offence from murder to manslaughter in recognition of the killing as a responsive, relational act of care.
We give Martin permission to appeal against the DPP, although we do not consider that the appeal has any real prospect of success. Our reason for giving permission is the first of the “two other compelling reasons” advanced in the application for permission to appeal. More particularly, we consider that our approach to the role of the DPP and to the decision in Purdy in relation to s2 of the Suicide Act raises questions of sufficient significance to merit consideration by the Court of Appeal.
The Court of Appeal has given its judgment in the Tony Nicklinson, Paul Lamb and 'Martin' cases, involving three physically disabled men who challenged the laws that make euthanasia and assisted suicide illegal. The ruling is unlikely to provide much comfort to Tony Nicklinson's family, who are continuing his fight for lawful euthanasia in the courts following his death in August 2012, or to Paul Lamb, who has taken Nicklinson's place in the judicial review proceedings. Part of Martin's appeal, which was argued on different grounds to that of Nicklinson and Lamb, was successful.