You can listen to the interview and read a short report on the BBC website.
Two men seeking assisted suicide are having their arguments heard by the Supreme Court this week in the latest round of their legal battle.
Two men seeking assisted suicide are having their arguments heard by the Supreme Court this week in the latest round of their legal battle.
Paul
Lamb, 57, was involved in a car accident in 1990, which left him paralysed,
save for limited use of his right hand. He is seeking permission for a doctor
in the UK to prescribe him lethal drugs so that he can take his own life.
‘Martin’,
48, suffered a brainstem stroke in August 2008, the effects of which are
permanent, leaving him virtually unable to move and unable to speak. He can
communicate only through small movements of his head and eyes and is totally
dependent on others for every aspect of his life.
Because of his physical disabilities, ‘Martin’ is unable to
take his own life. He wishes to go to Dignitas to end his life but his wife,
although she wants to be there at the end, is unwilling to take part in any of
the preparation or planning for her husband’s death.
The Director of Public Prosecutions’ guidelines state that a
prosecution is more likely where a ‘professional’ assists a suicide. ‘Martin’
is seeking further clarity from the DPP regarding the likelihood of a doctor or
carer assisting his suicide being prosecuted.
Both Lamb and ‘Martin’ are arguing that the current law
represents a disproportionate and discriminatory interference with their right
to a private and family life under Article 8 of the Human Rights Act, because
it does not allow them to end their lives at a time and in a manner of their
choosing - with the help of a medical professional.
Over the past 24 hours I have done six media interviews on
these cases on behalf of ‘Care Not Killing’– BBC One o’clock news, Channel 5 News,
three BBC regional radio stations and the Radio Four Today programme.
I argued that if the Supreme Court were to accede to either
man’s request this would be a far-reaching legal change that would remove legal
protection from a large number of vulnerable, elderly, and disabled people.
You can listen to the (brief) Radio Four debate with Raymond
Tallis and read a short BBC report on it here. The presenter was Sarah
Montague (pictured).
Because of the death overnight of actor Peter O’Toole, our
0830 slot was bumped to 0855 leaving less than five minutes to deal with these
very complex issues.
This was a matter beyond the presenters’ control and both
Sarah Montague and Evan Davies said afterward that they had wanted to move the
debate onto the concerning developments in other European countries that have
changed the law to allow euthanasia or assisted suicide. They regretted that
there was not time for this.
It is however noteworthy that the Belgian senate has in the
last week voted
to legalise euthanasia for children with terminal illnesses. The Belgian lower
house is expected to offer not opposition to this when it considers it in the spring
of 2014.
It is widely acknowledged that euthanasia is out
of control in Belgium: a 500% increase in cases in ten years; one third
involuntary; half not reported; euthanasia for blindness, anorexia, depression
and a botched sex change operation; organ
transplant euthanasia; and plans to extend euthanasia to children and
people with dementia.
One commentator has said that
Belgium has 'leaped head-first off a moral cliff'.
Call it incremental extension, mission creep or slippery
slope - whatever - it is strongly in evidence in Belgium.
With these two court cases proceeding and two bills due to
be debated in British parliaments next year we should heed the loud warnings
coming from across the English Channel.
Yes thank you
ReplyDelete