Let's have a wee stroll through the moral maze.
Right-to-die cases heard at Court of Appeal
Two severely disabled men are at the Court of Appeal trying to change laws governing the right to die.
Paul Lamb, from Leeds, was paralysed from the neck down in a car accident and wants a doctor to help him to die.
The 58-year-old, who has taken up the case begun by the late Tony Nicklinson, is seeking a ruling that would give doctors a defence to a murder charge.
The other man, a 48-year-old known only as Martin, is seeking a change to the prosecution of assisted suicide.
In August last year, the High Court turned down the challenges to the law in England and Wales, saying such decisions were for Parliament to decide.
The Court of Appeal hearing before the Lord Chief Justice, Lord Judge, and two other judges, is expected to last several days.
The family of the late Tony Nicklinson, including his wife Jane, is also a party in the case.
Speaking at the start of the hearing on Monday, Lord Judge said: "We are acutely aware of the desperate situation in which the appellants find themselves, and we are very sympathetic."
But he also said that "we cannot decide this case as a matter of personal sympathy".
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22506309
Personally I am pro choice. If your quality of life is very poor I believe you have the right to decide whether your life should be terminated. I also think that in a case where someone is beyond medical help - i.e. a cure and not just life prolonging drugs - then I think the family has the right to decide whether their loved one should have their suffering ended or not.
I've had to watch two people I cared deeply about waste away to an incontinent dribbly mess and in both cases their lives were prolonged without consideration for either their feelings or those of their families.
Had they been animals then they would have been put out of their misery instead of putting them through the shame they felt at having their loved ones watch them waste away and die. In the case of my late Nan I offered to help via the pillow over the face method but
despite that being her wish I was prevented from doing so.
I've heard some pretty weak arguments against such a change in the law, mainly from the medical profession or the God brigade, and one such argument was that families will just use it as a way to bump off unwanted relatives to get some inheritence cash. Not a very valid argument for me.
I would love to hear the opinions of the fine forum folk. I suspect that this is a subject that many have given a lot of consideration to.
Please excuse spelling and grammar but I am in a rush. Wheeeeeee!!
