Help to die?

[Clitheroekid]

Moderator Message:
This topic doesn't strictly fit in the Legal Issues board, but as noted by the OP it's not easy to see where it would best sit, so I have left it here.

However, the discussion of methods of suicide/assisted dying are not appropriate on this board or elsewhere on the site. Those posts have been removed. The moderator team and the site admins would appreciate it if these topics were not reposted.

chas49

This isn't strictly a legal issue, so apologies to the mods, but I couldn't think where else to post it. It's hardly an appropriate subject for The Snug, but neither is it a matter of religion - at least, not for me - so I didn't think it should appear on the Meaning of Life board, which seems to be dominated by religious discussion.

In any case, it does have a nominal claim to being a legal issue, in that I was consulted yesterday about the subject in a legal context, though I have to say that for once I had no ready answer.

The question was put to me by an elderly client, and I know that he and his wife both have the dreaded `underlying health problems'.

He's both highly intelligent and very sensible - not always bedfellows! - and he obviously realised that if the situation were to become as bad as some of the more pessimistic experts have predicted he and his wife would be way down the pecking order.

What he wanted to know, therefore, was to what extent he and his wife could assist each other to die. He said that neither of them was particularly afraid of dying as such, but they were very scared of dying in extreme pain - basically suffocating from being unable to breathe.

He was envisaging a situation where not only would there be any hospital beds available but there wouldn't be any medical attention available at all.

If that situation were to arise he said that they both wanted to ensure that the one who was dying could be enabled to die peacefully and painlessly.

I did my best to advise him on the purely legal aspects of it - this was made easier (`easier' being very much a relative term in this context) as I'd only recently advised someone whose relative had been arrested for assisting their wife to die.

However, it made me think about the potentially tens or hundreds of thousands of people who might - again, assuming the doomiest predictions are correct - be in that situation.

This then led to an interesting and difficult ethical question. Assuming this scenario were to arise - where many people were going to face a pretty horrible and painful death with no medical help available - should the government change the law so as to decriminalise such actions?

Even more problematical, should the government actively help people in this situation by allowing or even assisting them to acquire the means to help the victims - in practical terms, the acquisition of lethal drugs, and instructions on how to administer them?

I appreciate that it's a rather gruesome question, and I sincerely hope it never needs to be given serious consideration, but after giving it a lot of thought my own view is that despite all the ethical issues it would be more humane for the government to act positively than to leave things as they are.

I'd be interested to hear the views of fellow Fools, both as to the legal and ethical aspects of the question.

[gryffron]

This issue has been challenged again and again in courts. And again and again the courts have given the same answer. It's illegal. It's not up to them to change the law. The legal issue could not possibly be clearer. Indeed, I'm astounded people are still allowed to challenge it in court. Nice little earner for the lawyers I suppose, and funded by the numerous pressure groups? I hope they have to pay the govt's costs when they inevitably lose.

Morally, seems to be divided along religious lines, with the religious opposing on principle. While the atheists (including myself) are generally in favour, so long as adequate controls could be put in place to ensure it isn't simply used to get rid of "troublesome" old relatives.
As regards changing the law. I don't think any PM wants to be remembered for this. So I can't see any change happening unless or until it becomes a major issue for the public. Which I suppose is unlikely to happen, as its only ever a pressing issue for a tiny minority.

Gryff

[ReformedCharacter]

Most pet owners are content to have their animals 'put to sleep' to prevent unnecessary suffering. It's a pity we cannot do the same for ourselves.

RC

[Dod101]

There's a guy called Philip Nitschke who heads a company called Exit International. For a long time, he's promoted the right to choose and actively marketed kits with which to do it (although they are sold as home brewing kits)

Moderator Message:
Links and discussion of methods removed (chas49)

That sounds pretty gruesome as well because it is not unlike what the elderly gent is trying to prevent surely, suffocating from being unable to breathe. And in any case it must be illegal.

I think what the chap ought to do is speak to his GP/Community Nurses. They have what is euphemistically called a 'just in case' box, officially provided by the NHS for terminally ill patients to ease them into their final days or hours. It contains morphine, sedatives and so on. To kill his wife is illegal and there is no getting away from that irrespective of our own views on the matter. The 'just in case' box seems to me to be a sensible compromise and the community nurses know how to administer its contents. What is being described is not after all a long drawn out matter like MND.

Dod

[johnhemming]

In terms of English law it is the public interest test on prosecution that generally acts to prevent people who assist others to die from being prosecuted.
https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/s ... ng-suicide

Best really to read the guidance rather than me quote bits of it.

[UncleEbenezer]

In terms of English law it is the public interest test on prosecution that generally acts to prevent people who assist others to die from being prosecuted.
https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/s ... ng-suicide

Best really to read the guidance rather than me quote bits of it.

Public interest in a prosecution is a horribly tenuous thing to rely on. Especially in the light of a lawyer's anecdotes:

... I'd only recently advised someone whose relative had been arrested for assisting their wife to die.

( Their wife??? How many husbands did she have? )

[johnhemming]

Public interest in a prosecution is a horribly tenuous thing to rely on. Especially in the light of a lawyer's anecdotes:

A decision to prosecute could be quashed by a process of judicial review using the principle of legitimate expectation. In many ways it is quite similar to putting in statute acceptable circumstances under which assisted suicide is not a crime.

[swill453]

... I'd only recently advised someone whose relative had been arrested for assisting their wife to die.

( Their wife??? How many husbands did she have? )

Possibly none.

Scott.

[UncleEbenezer]

Public interest in a prosecution is a horribly tenuous thing to rely on. Especially in the light of a lawyer's anecdotes:

A decision to prosecute could be quashed by a process of judicial review using the principle of legitimate expectation. In many ways it is quite similar to putting in statute acceptable circumstances under which assisted suicide is not a crime.

That's a ghastly fudge.

And it'll never work for ordinary people, for whom legal shenanigans are out of the question. In a civilised world I could've spared my mother her last three months of cancer, when she was too far gone even to read or listen to music, or go out in a wheelchair.

[johnhemming]

It is in essence the same legal test as if someone was prosecuted and similar arguments used. The difference is that a prosecution would be prevented from happening.

I accept that most people don't know how to use Judicial Review, but lawyers should.

[UncleEbenezer]

I accept that most people don't know how to use Judicial Review, but lawyers should.

What's the good of that, to those of us (I imagine, a vast majority) who cannot even think of affording a lawyer either from our own pocket or legal aid?

[johnhemming]

The same applies if people are prosecuted with the defence being defined as the same as the guidance. Obviously there is some criminal legal aid. However, I don't think there is a legal aid system for advice before anyone takes any action that may or may not be criminal.

[chas49]

Moderator Message:
Posts discussing methods of suicicde/assisted dying have been removed from this thread. Please do not post further discussion of this on this or any other thread. (chas49)