Right to die refused

#2
Its one of those desperately sad cases - my instinct is that the CPS would not prosecute in this instance if something happened, but to subject someone to a life long virtual prison sentence is so wrong in my book.
 
#3
Who's life is it anyway? Some bloke on TV saying that this guy could go on hunger strike like an IRA prisoner, I don't see the connection there at all. I wish doctors and solicitors would recognise that death can be a healing outcome.
 
#4
I feel sorry for the bloke and I think its a real shame that he is being forced to exist like that, and for the benefit of whom? if it were me I would be thinking along the same lines as he is. If he had just lost the use of his legs or something like loss of hearing or sight, then it would be a different matter and he should just adapt and get on with it as thousands of others do, but he literally can't do anything, he cant even talk or turn his head, and it sounds like prior to his stroke he was a very active and outgoing bloke which must be crushing when all that is taken away from you.
This case led to a big argument between me and my parents because they both reckon that life is so precious that the bloke should be happy that he's still alive regardless of his suffering & indignity, and that he's basically a selfish ******** for wishing to die, and that if he is allowed to go ahead with it then every GP will suddenly be a Harold Shipman type and that relatives will be forcing elderly people into assisted suicide against their will for financial gain, which frightens me because that says that if I ended up like Tony, they would force me to live like that against my will. At the same time my dad is a farmer who has no problem with euthanising lame or diseased livestock, double standards?
 
#5
Bloody terrible situation. The precedents set if the courts agreed though would have very wide long term implications. this is an area where british law needs an option of applying discretion.
 
#6
Who's life is it anyway? Some bloke on TV saying that this guy could go on hunger strike like an IRA prisoner, I don't see the connection there at all. I wish doctors and solicitors would recognise that death can be a healing outcome.
The problem is two fold - jurisprudence and medical ethics.

Jurisprudence - the law currently states that it is illegal to take a human life. This is a simple law to understanda a very firm barrier. If the law were to change, even for such a case as this, then it removes that barrier. Once removed then it allows the scope to eventually expand and it becomes more difficult to successfully prosecute those who kill, whatever the reason.

Medical - doctors swear on oath to preserve life, to allow them to take life totally undermines centuries of medicine. If the law did allow for a doctor to take a life then Harold Shipman could possibly have been acquitted, his defence would have been that his victims had expressed a wish to die.

The law should stay as it is. I couldn't see a loved one suffer like that and damn the consequences. I'd take my chances with a jury of my peers and an understanding judge.
 
#8
I think that there would have to be a proper procedure in place as a safe guard eg a formal agreement witnessed by a solicitor between all parties, person, relatives and a doctor or other practitioner, for instance a technician like in the US for lethal injections.
 
#9
I'd rather be dead than live like that. I've often thought that enforced locked in syndrome would be great for nonces, rapists, terrorists and granny-bashers. No need for prisons then. Just dump the cnuts on the streets: no disability benefits, accomodation, wheelchair or anything. Just let their families take care of em. Or they can starve/freeze or whatever.
 
#10
The problem is two fold - jurisprudence and medical ethics.

Jurisprudence - the law currently states that it is illegal to take a human life. This is a simple law to understanda a very firm barrier. If the law were to change, even for such a case as this, then it removes that barrier. Once removed then it allows the scope to eventually expand and it becomes more difficult to successfully prosecute those who kill, whatever the reason.

Medical - doctors swear on oath to preserve life, to allow them to take life totally undermines centuries of medicine. If the law did allow for a doctor to take a life then Harold Shipman could possibly have been acquitted, his defence would have been that his victims had expressed a wish to die.

The law should stay as it is. I couldn't see a loved one suffer like that and damn the consequences. I'd take my chances with a jury of my peers and an understanding judge.
Well it could be argued that as the law law already allows for human life to be taken in certain self defence circumstances it is not an entirely illegal act.

But beyond this it seems to me that death is viewed as some kind of failure in Western society, it must be avoided at all costs, even though of course it is entirely natural and inevitable for everyone, sooner or later.

Not sure if others agree with my thinking but if so, does it then become clear that this mindset hampers sensible ways forward on what is a very difficult matter in the first place.
 
#11
If someone wants to die they should be allowed to.
Unless its Ian Huntley or Ian Brady

They keep trying and I'm happy to say that the law keeps them alive and in d
In this poor buggers case though I really feel for the poor soul but I have to agree with Dingerr. I doubt a jury could be found that would convict find his wife guilty without being instructed to do so by a judge if she assisted his death.
 
#12
I'd rather be dead than live like that. I've often thought that enforced locked in syndrome would be great for nonces, rapists, terrorists and granny-bashers. No need for prisons then. Just dump the cnuts on the streets: no disability benefits, accomodation, wheelchair or anything. Just let their families take care of em. Or they can starve/freeze or whatever.
The way you articulate & succinctly explain government policy so eloquently, you must be Andy Coulson`s successor as Communications Director at No. 10.
 
#13
To let even one person legally kill themselves by 'assisted suicide' which is effectively murdering someone with their compliance, is to open the doors to an increase of assisted death. Look at the caricature the abortion laws have become, started with the noblest intentions, noe the doc's draw is stuffed with presigned authorisations.

As far as I know, nobody so far has been convicted in circumstances similar to these. The fact that they will stand trial and could be convicted serves to make the killer stop and consider very carefully before they act.

Holland legalised it and in 2003 there were 1626 cases reported, 2010 3136-4050 reported, with the campaign for death on request for the over 70s who are tired of life.

'Come on ma, your 78, your eyes are failing, you don't have your own teeth anymore, do it for the family, this house is worth a mint, you wouldn't let your own grandkids miss out? Just sign here, and here, and here on the pink copy, thanks ma, the doctor will see you now.'

Give it time and mentally ill, and those deemed to be unlikely to have an enjoyable productive life will be included.

I feel sorry for the guy in question, but if his family are really that passionate about it, then do it, take your day in court, and let justice take its course.
 

OldSnowy

LE
Moderator
Book Reviewer
#14
To let even one person legally kill themselves by 'assisted suicide' which is effectively murdering someone with their compliance, is to open the doors to an increase of assisted death. Look at the caricature the abortion laws have become, started with the noblest intentions, noe the doc's draw is stuffed with presigned authorisations.

As far as I know, nobody so far has been convicted in circumstances similar to these. The fact that they will stand trial and could be convicted serves to make the killer stop and consider very carefully before they act.

Holland legalised it and in 2003 there were 1626 cases reported, 2010 3136-4050 reported, with the campaign for death on request for the over 70s who are tired of life.

'Come on ma, your 78, your eyes are failing, you don't have your own teeth anymore, do it for the family, this house is worth a mint, you wouldn't let your own grandkids miss out? Just sign here, and here, and here on the pink copy, thanks ma, the doctor will see you now.'

Give it time and mentally ill, and those deemed to be unlikely to have an enjoyable productive life will be included.

I feel sorry for the guy in question, but if his family are really that passionate about it, then do it, take your day in court, and let justice take its course.
Spot on. It's not that he just wants to die. He wants someone to kill him, and that's a different thing altogether. It's not that long ago (certainly within living memory ) that suicide was a criminal offence - although, presumably, tricky to prosecute, but whatever.

Pressure on old foilks, whether self-induced or otherwise, will be immense, to jump off the edge, and leave the money to the kids.
 

jarrod248

LE
Gallery Guru
#15
To let even one person legally kill themselves by 'assisted suicide' which is effectively murdering someone with their compliance, is to open the doors to an increase of assisted death. Look at the caricature the abortion laws have become, started with the noblest intentions, noe the doc's draw is stuffed with presigned authorisations.

As far as I know, nobody so far has been convicted in circumstances similar to these. The fact that they will stand trial and could be convicted serves to make the killer stop and consider very carefully before they act.

Holland legalised it and in 2003 there were 1626 cases reported, 2010 3136-4050 reported, with the campaign for death on request for the over 70s who are tired of life.

'Come on ma, your 78, your eyes are failing, you don't have your own teeth anymore, do it for the family, this house is worth a mint, you wouldn't let your own grandkids miss out? Just sign here, and here, and here on the pink copy, thanks ma, the doctor will see you now.'

Give it time and mentally ill, and those deemed to be unlikely to have an enjoyable productive life will be included.

I feel sorry for the guy in question, but if his family are really that passionate about it, then do it, take your day in court, and let justice take its course.
That's my thoughts, why lose the inheritance on those nursing home fees?
 

Sixty

ADC
Moderator
Book Reviewer
#16
I feel sorry for the guy in question, but if his family are really that passionate about it, then do it, take your day in court, and let justice take its course.
Aye. There's not a jury in the land that would convict if someone put a loved one out of their misery provided that the person involved had made that wish known.

It's terribly messy but it works (ish)
 
#17
Dingerr, I understand if you don't want to answer but I'll ask:

With your injuries, did you ever contemplate what this chap is fighting for? It's not something I can really comprehend.
 

BuggerAll

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
#20
[/Sensible Mode] If I understand the court ruling what they are saying is that as the law stands at the moment assisting in a suicide is illegal and that to change that requires an Act of Parliament. It's a pity the courts are not more inclined to think that way when it comes to the human rights of terrorists and other people who should not be in this country. In my view it is time for parliament to act. [/Sensible Mode]

[/Arrse Mode] One might think that dignity and self determination of by an individual are human rights but the 2 chaps in this case have failed to be black, disabled, lesbian or muslim so don't really qualify for human rights.

"Not disabled?" you say, "how much more ****ing disabled do you want the poor sod to be?" unfortunately he has set himself against the disabled right mafia orthodox views and therefore has lost his right to be considered as disabled.[/Arrse Mode]

[/Rant Mode] I've been quite sickened to listen to the various christian and disabled groups who profess mock sympathy for Mr Nicklinson and 'Martin' but deny them any rights and autonomy and are happy to condemn them to what they say is an intolerable life or even worse they are happy to see them starve themselves to death so that they can continue in their disgusting hypocrisy. [/Rant Mode]
 

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top