The Claimant seeks three declarations, namely: i) A declaration that it would not be unlawful, on the grounds of necessity, for Mr Nicklinson's GP, or another doctor, to terminate or assist the termination of Mr Nicklinson's life. ii) Further or alternatively, a declaration that the current law of murder and/or of assisted suicide is incompatible with Mr Nicklinson's right to respect for private life under Article 8, contrary to sections 1 and 6 Human Rights Act 1998, in so far as it criminalises voluntary active euthanasia and/or assisted suicide. iii) Further or alternatively, a declaration that existing domestic law and practice fail adequately to regulate the practice of active euthanasia (both voluntary and involuntary), in breach of Article 2.
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.
Le Ministère public neuchâtelois ne fera pas recours contre l’ancien médecin cantonal Daphné Berner, jugée à la fin de l’an dernier pour euthanasie active. Même s’il n’est pas entièrement convaincu par les motifs retenus par le Tribunal de police, il souligne que l’acquittement n’a été prononcé qu’en raison de circonstances très particulières.
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.
This paper examines the controversial and complex issues of euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide (PAS). I begin by defining and distinguishing these two terms and explain how they relate to each other. I also describe the medical doctrine of double effect, in which relieving pain comes at the expense of hastening death. Then, I give a brief overview of the common law defense of necessity, which is practically the sole defense available to or used by physicians accused of committing euthanasia or PAS. Finally, I analyze the legal doctrines of euthanasia and PAS, focusing on legislation and cases in the European Union — primarily the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and Switzerland — and the U.S. states of Oregon, Washington, and Montana.
The case of a paralysed man who wants doctors to be able to take his life without fear of prosecution is being heard at the High Court. Tony Nicklinson, 58, from Wiltshire, has locked-in syndrome following a stroke seven years ago. The hearing represents a fundamental challenge to the law on murder, the BBC's Fergal Walsh reports. [includes short interview with Penney Lewis]
After a stroke in 2005 left him almost completely paralysed, Tony Nicklinson has been fighting for the right to end his own life. Here, ahead of a high court ruling, he is interviewed via Twitter by Observer readers and Elizabeth Day, who meets his family and supporters – along with opponents of euthanasia
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.
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.