Can we apply the same to the incurably crap (e.g. Marcelino?)

Woman Wins Right To Die - Sky News

A woman who is totally paralysed from the neck down has made legal history by winning a High Court battle to be allowed to die. The court accepted the 43-year-old woman's arguments to have her life support machine turned off.

She has been allowed to die with dignity after being on a ventilator for over a year with no hope of recovery.

The former social care worker, known as Miss B, said she did not want to stay alive in her present condition because she had been "very ill for long periods."

She claimed the right to die under the European Convention on Human Rights. Britain's top woman judge ruled that doctors who refused to switch off the ventilator after the woman was deemed competent to make up her own mind were guilty of "unlawful trespass".

Dame Elizabeth Butler-Sloss, President of the High Court family division, awarded the woman £55,000 costs against the NHS Trust responsible for the hospital and £100 in damages.

In a statement issued through her solicitors, the woman said: "This is a balanced and well thought-out judgment and I am very pleased with the outcome of this case.

"The law on consent to treatment is very clear and this has been a long and unnecessary and personally painful process. I hope the judgment will be a useful document for future decision-making."

Dame Elizabeth also gave Miss B the right to be transferred to an appropriate intensive care unit at another hospital where doctors have already agreed to carry out her wishes.

-- Anonymous, March 22, 2002

Answers

My Catholic guilt is probably in full effect, but I don't like the idea of assisted suicide. All a bit dodgy if you ask me...especially after reading 'Amsterdam'. Obviously I'm not in the position of having to consider that kind of decision, but I don't think this is a useful or morally good judgement.

-- Anonymous, March 22, 2002

My dad died of Motor Neurone in 1999, which is the same disease that Diane Pretty is suffering from. Luckily (in a horrible way) he didn't suffer long enough for suicide to be an issue. One thing I do know is that he would have refused to go to hospital/into care. I believe if you avoid the machines and drugs that keep you alive, you can often exercise your right to die anyway, by giving up your will to live.

-- Anonymous, March 22, 2002

A very tragic and problematic case. On balance, I feel this is the correct and compassionate judgement.

It is regrettable that this poor woman had to go through such prolonged legal proceedings to arrive at this point, but one has to appreciate the difficult precedents involved.

Let's hope her final moments are more dignified and peaceful than has been induced by the prolonged process she has had to go through to win the right to have her final wish accepted. She is a brave lady.

Very, very sad - I really feel for her husband at this time when 'victory' must seem terribly hollow.

-- Anonymous, March 22, 2002

Having just read the details of the case, I have to agree with the decision. If she doesn't want the machine, it shouldn't be forced on her. It would be a different matter if she could survive naturally without intervention and wanted assistance to actually kill herself.

-- Anonymous, March 22, 2002

....agreed Peter. THAT is indeed the key issue in this case - in fact I had thought there were already precedents for such cases.

-- Anonymous, March 22, 2002

Bobby, there seems to be some confusion here. This is NOT akin to the Dianne Pretty case at all. It is not assisted suicide. The unnamed lady in question wishes to exercise the same right possessed by all of us, to refuse treatment. She has been shown to be fully competent to make such a decision being in full possesion of her faculties. This court decision simply follows existing precedent and does not move us further along the road to euthenasia in any way at all. I don't think this case raises any moral issue in that way. Many people refuse cancer treatment because the quality of life they retain they consider not worth the suffering. It would be ridiculous to force people to take treatment against their will.

-- Anonymous, March 22, 2002

Wow £100 damages, makes it all worthwhile.

-- Anonymous, March 22, 2002

I'm sure the judgement does make it worthwhile for the lady. The damages are irrelevant.

-- Anonymous, March 22, 2002

True enough Pete, but after what was described as "a long and unnecessary and personally painful process" it doesn't seem a fitting settlement, especially when read alongside the £55,000.00 legal fees.

-- Anonymous, March 22, 2002

It was the lady's own request that the damages be nominal.

-- Anonymous, March 22, 2002

Di Pretty - am I the only one who can see something darkly comic in that name?

-- Anonymous, March 22, 2002

.... only a scriptwriter could see it, Dan.

-- Anonymous, March 22, 2002