Not an easy one this...Gotta feel for him and his family.. http://news.sky.com/home/uk-news/article/16249248 A paralysed man, who is only able to communicate through blinking his eyes, would be condemned to ever increasing misery if judges fail to agree with his right to die, his lawyers have claimed. Locked-in syndrome victim Tony Nicklinson has taken his fight against the current law on assisted suicide to the High Court in London. The Wiltshire father of two has spent the past seven years unable to do more than blink or move his head slightly, since suffering a catastrophic stroke. He communicates through a specially adapted computer, or through his wife holding up a plastic board with letters on it, which he blinks and nods at to spell out words. Mr Nicklinson's legal team told the court he is being condemned to live in a state of suffering and indignity by the current rules on assisted suicide and euthanasia. A barrister representing the 58-year-old told the three judges hearing the case that he wanted a doctor to be able to lawfully end his life without fear of prosecution. In courtroom three at the Royal Courts of Justice, Paul Bowen QC said Mr Nicklinson was not seeking to persuade the judges to "introduce an all-encompassing new regime legalising euthanasia and assisted suicide." The barrister added: "While he would welcome such a change, he accepts that such a regime can only be introduced by Parliament. "However, there is no sign of Parliament introducing such a regime any time soon that would afford the claimant the opportunity of an assisted death with dignity."
Well I for one would not like to be in that state. If I was I would rather just go. Let's be honest about it, if you kept a dog alive like that you'd be done for cruelty.
The man should have the right to die. I suppose things like life insurance and pensions and things like that are tricky? With all the advances in medicine we have created a paradox that wasn't there before. Effectively we are keeping him alive against his wishes where he wouldn't survive without help.
We treat sick animals better and they can't even request in a calm and sane manner that they would really prefer to be put out of THEIR misery....... A sick, sick, sick view point tantamount to torture to appease a bloody 2,000 year old book, utter madness.
I agree with helping a man do that if it is his final wish I for one could not live like that and would want to be assisted
I would not like to be in his place. The argument that people opposed to him are using is that it opens the way for judicial murder
In court maybe but I would be very surprised if the Church(es) had not been involved in the talks about this one. Also I don't think anyone is saying you should have the right to smother your terminally ill spouse should you decide between you it is the right thing to do. If we have a system in place for right and proper television ownership that is enforced I think perhaps an application form could be drawn up and the licenses granted on a case by case basis should defined criteria be met.
If someone wants to die and has nothing to live for - and could (potentially) be a burden on others, then why not let them die? The government need to see sense on this and allow it to happen - whatever doors it may open can surely be closed - this bloke is paralysed - he can blink and move his head slightly - what sort of life is that for anyone? If I was in that state I would want exactly the same
Ex Boro player Gary Parkinson has the same thing http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/17677130 as for the legality etc of it, why not let them as long as its done in a humane manner like Switzerland (not a pillow over the face type)
Your life, your choice as far as I'm concerned. I've worked with a few terminally ill people but the saddest are those with dementia. I'd take a bullet over that any day. Evil disease.
