Tony Nicklinson loses right to die case

[Collider]

Some people here seem a little confused. It is NOT illegal to kill yourself. What is illegal is to kill someone else, even if they ask you too. the problem is not so much situations like this one, but the slippery slope it leads to: grandparent not dying soon enough even though they are very ill? Kill them, fake their signature on a piece of paper, say they asked you to. Possible? Of course? Likely? Probably. This is mainly the law keeping the situation absolutely clear.

However...

It seems to me that when someone goes to court repeatedly, and can be interviewed by a judge to make sure pressure is not being put on them by relatives, wriggle-room should be allowed. But I think EVERY case should go before a court, and an appeal.

I agree that there needs to be a really robust process though I wouldn't think the court's time would be best served hearing multiple cases, I think a change in the law to allow assisted dying and then a panel of experts and an appeal system would be something that would move it on.

I don't think anyone who seriously supports this would want to see people be able to be killed with no consent and no process as it could be exploited, but there could be safeguards put in place.

 

[Nexus]

I found the documentary quite strange really, on the one hand it was quite shocking, on the other I think I was concerned that people effectively have to go there when they could still carry on living for longer because they have to be able to travel and able to take the medication themselves. I felt the man in the film feared waiting and then losing the right to do it by not having the capacity. I think that was deeply sad.

Yeah the guy who dies in the film seemed like he could have gone on living for much longer until his symptoms really got the best of him. I think his wife did well to hide her emotion, as she was clearly quite upset by it and I don't think she expected him to want to die then and there, I think she thought it would just be a visit to look at Dignitas, but she obviously respected his wishes.

It was also strange how at the end of the documentary, the younger guy had since been and now gone.

I suppose the odd aspect about it really is that we all have to die at some stage, however it's rare that we get to choose when and how. So its somewhat morbid how this little chalet is the end for so many by their own choosing.

 

[DAIR]

I agree that there needs to be a really robust process though I wouldn't think the court's time would be best served hearing multiple cases, I think a change in the law to allow assisted dying and then a panel of experts and an appeal system would be something that would move it on.

I don't think anyone who seriously supports this would want to see people be able to be killed with no consent and no process as it could be exploited, but there could be safeguards put in place.

I'm all for having safeguards in place. I'd just like a little common sense to come into play.

As mentioned earlier we have no problem putting ill animals to sleep. Tony is no doubt depressed and in huge amounts of pain. The guy just wants to take a long rest.

 

[craarc]

afaik the swiss clinic is not the only option it is legal in holland belgium and luxembourg also so i dont know what the options or the local laws there are but i guess thats not really the point. its obvious in this case its his choice. each case on its own merits but its still so sad that he has to go thru this.

 

[Theophany]

I think people should be allowed to commit euthanasia if they want.

Isn't the problem here not a question of whether or not he should be allowed to kill himself, but more that the law for murder would have to be changed and one allowing euthanasia be created?

The law for murder doesn't need to be changed, it's the Suicide Act which legalised suicide, but made assisted suicide illegal that would need to be changed.

For example, my thinking is that if Tony Nicklinson's wife helped him die, she would be put on trial for assisted suicide, which under the Suicide Act is determined to be tantamount to murder. If the law were changed, people engaging in assisted suicide would not be tried as murderers.

But I am open to being corrected on this as I have no legal training.

 

[Collider]

Yeah the guy who dies in the film seemed like he could have gone on living for much longer until his symptoms really got the best of him. I think his wife did well to hide her emotion, as she was clearly quite upset by it and I don't think she expected him to want to die then and there, I think she thought it would just be a visit to look at Dignitas, but she obviously respected his wishes.

It was also strange how at the end of the documentary, the younger guy had since been and now gone.

I suppose the odd aspect about it really is that we all have to die at some stage, however it's rare that we get to choose when and how. So its somewhat morbid how this little chalet is the end for so many by their own choosing.

I felt the same I felt very sorry for his wife, I believe they would have had longer together if the status of assisted dying here had been different.

It was a rather ambivalent film for me in some ways because as you rightly point out the younger guy had also done it and neither of them seemed to me to be at the point I know people get to (my father died of bowel cancer) where they would want to die because they had tried to live and decided enough was enough. In a way the film made it about people who were not as sick as I thought people would 'want' to be to have access to being able to end it.

It is as you say though the choice they make, I wish there were better laws here so people could make a choice like that later in their illness. I know my father would have wanted to have that, or someone to actually kill him (and they do effectively overdose you to death / starve you to death in the end it seems anyway so what is the difference except the power is with someone other than the person whose life it is).

I'm all for having safeguards in place. I'd just like a little common sense to come into play.

As mentioned earlier we have no problem putting ill animals to sleep. Tony is no doubt depressed and in huge amounts of pain. The guy just wants to take a long rest.

I agree, I think my post read as if I wanted safeguards not sense so I can see how that came over. What I meant was more that once there was a change in the law we would need sensible safeguards, I completely support his right to have his life ended in the way he wants it. I don't think anyone who is rational about supporting him wants a free for all.

 

[craarc]

if a member of my family was there begging to be but out of thier misery id be hard pushed not to help them. could you let one of yours suffer like he is
that family have acted with the utmost dignity and respect for the law how they cope is beyond me tbh

 

[Marmot]

If they treated every case individually and brought in the correct parties to make an informed and humanistic decision, I cannot see the issue.

It seems to me that when someone goes to court repeatedly, and can be interviewed by a judge to make sure pressure is not being put on them by relatives, wriggle-room should be allowed. But I think EVERY case should go before a court, and an appeal.

There are far more individuals in this situation than the media circus has led you to believe. It would simply not be practical to go to high court on an individual basis. In this case, the Judge made the correct decision, maybe not Ethically, but correct none the less.

 

[A.N.Other]

If I understand all of this correctly, are people not getting the wrong end of the stick here a little. The court has simply said that with present law, this constitutes murder, as someone else would have to carry out the entire act for him. It is not the courts place to change the laws surrounding assisted suicide, but to enforce them, hence this is not their decision to make in he first place.

I'm fully in support of his right to die, and would want it for myself should I be in that situation, but unfortunately this is something that's going to have to go through parliament.

 

[Yaayuh!]

I fully support their fight for the right to die. I don't really understand why euthanasia is viewed as such a bad thing. This man is clearly in pain and is of sound mind to make such a decision. I can only imagine how he feels right now. I mean to have lived such an active life for so long. To then have it taken away so aggressively by an illness like this is truly sad.

We live in a country where a lot of us wouldn't be able to stand seeing our pets/domestic animals (let's throw horses into the mix too) in excruciating pain. So much so that we see no problem putting them to "sleep". Why can't the same token be passed on to people?

Crazy world we live in.

My thoughts entirely.

If I understand all of this correctly, are people not getting the wrong end of the stick here a little. The court has simply said that with present law, this constitutes murder, as someone else would have to carry out the entire act for him. It is not the courts place to change the laws surrounding assisted suicide, but to enforce them, hence this is not their decision to make in he first place.

I'm fully in support of his right to die, and would want it for myself should I be in that situation, but unfortunately this is something that's going to have to go through parliament.

Indeed, this is quite an annoying roadblock in such cases.
There needs to be a change in law via parliament before we can any further.

 

[Marmot]

If I understand all of this correctly, are people not getting the wrong end of the stick here a little. The court has simply said that with present law, this constitutes murder, as someone else would have to carry out the entire act for him. It is not the courts place to change the laws surrounding assisted suicide, but to enforce them, hence this is not their decision to make in he first place.

Indeedy, they cannot make exceptions. It's up to parliament.

 

[Xordium]

Indeedy, they cannot make exceptions. It's up to parliament.

They make the exception to allow for parents and medical staff to make that decision for minors.

 

[Marmot]

They make the exception to allow for parents and medical staff to make that decision for minors.

Not on an individual basis.

 

[Xordium]

Not on an individual basis.

Sometimes they take it to the courts and sometimes they do not it depends on whether all parties (well bar the one who will die) agree or not. Like it or not the exception is there.

 

[do_ron_ron]

Ultimately, if you have a sound mind, it should be your decision and yours alone. I've never understood why it's so taboo to want to kill yourself.

Somebody in the situation as this guy would fail the sound mind test. He is totally distressed at his situation as you would expect but this would make his judgement poor.

 

[do_ron_ron]

So I think in Tony Nicklinson's case, Dignitas won't work for him because it still requires him to drink the liquid without the aid of anyone else, which he can't do. I'd seen talk of Nicklinson going there if he could afford it, but I'm sure its fruitless and given the media interest, if that was a viable option, I would have thought a generous party would pay for the trip.

Afair, the point about allowing people to go to Switzerland was because they had a terminal illness anyway. Mr Nicklinson does not have a terminal illness.

 

[Xordium]

Somebody in the situation as this guy would fail the sound mind test. He is totally distressed at his situation as you would expect but this would make his judgement poor.

And yet we break bad news to people every day and then expect them to make a valid consent to life changing and potentially ending treatment there and then. It is a valid point though and why life-ending options should be enabled prior to their necessity.

 

[Xordium]

Mr Nicklinson does not have a terminal illness.

He is unable to perform the basic functions of life therefore he is being assisted to live.

 

[Gav]

I have recently had a conversation with my mum about this very situation. She has recently been diagnosed with cancer.....

If it comes to the point where she is clearly not going to get better and her life is being spent in agony with no quality of life...

I would do anything it took to make her pain go away.. legal or not..

If i were sent to jail for it... so be it.

 

[iamtheoneneo]

Im 50/50 on this case, he seems to have good brain function and I do think his predicament is basically destroying his mental health aswell. Not saying that I would ever want to be in his position but hes alive can actually speak. Is his condition similar to Hawkings now? because it seems that way and look at him....

Terri Schiavo the other hand was pretty open and shut, she had half her brain missing/zero ability to ever recover yet they argued about it forever until one day common sense won over scoring brownie points with certain groups. but it should have never of gone on for 5+ years like it did.

I have recently had a conversation with my mum about this very situation. She has recently been diagnosed with cancer.....
If it comes to the point where she is clearly not going to get better and her life is being spent in agony with no quality of life...
I would do anything it took to make her pain go away.. legal or not..
If i were sent to jail for it... so be it.

you wouldn't though, iv been there and its not worth it. Cancer is very different to what were talking about though - you can refuse treatment for cancer right up till nearly the end given that most cancerous cells spread at a quite slow rate and mental health is not effected till towards the final few months