The book strives for as complete and dispassionate a description of the situation as possible and covers in detail: the substantive law applicable to euthanasia, physician-assisted suicide, withholding and withdrawing treatment, use of pain relief in potentially lethal doses, terminal sedation, and termination of life without a request (in particular in the case of newborn babies); the process of legal development that has led to the current state of the law; the system of legal control and its operation in practice; and, the results of empirical research concerning actual medical practice.
A woman with multiple sclerosis has begun a High Court challenge to clarify the law on assisted suicide. Debbie Purdy, 45, from Bradford, is considering travelling to Switzerland - where assisted suicide is legal - to end her life. But she fears her husband, Omar Puente, could be prosecuted for going with her when he got back to the UK.
Background: In Switzerland, non-medical right-to-die organisations such as Exit Deutsche Schweiz and Dignitas offer suicide assistance to members suffering from incurable diseases. Objectives: First, to determine whether differences exist between the members who received assistance in suicide from Exit Deutsche Schweiz and Dignitas. Second, to investigate whether the practices of Exit Deutsche Schweiz have changed since the 1990s. Conclusions: Weariness of life rather than a fatal or hopeless medical condition may be a more common reason for older members of Exit Deutsche Schweiz to commit suicide. The strong over-representation of women in both Exit Deutsche Schweiz and Dignitas suicides is an important phenomenon so far largely overlooked and in need of further study.
A woman with multiple sclerosis has lost her Appeal Court case to clarify the law on assisted suicide. Debbie Purdy, 45, from Bradford, is considering going to a Swiss clinic to end her life, but fears her husband may be charged on his return to the UK. She wanted clarification of where her husband, Omar Puente would stand legally if he helped her in any way. But Ms Purdy said after the ruling: "I feel that I have won my argument, despite having lost the appeal."
Parliamentarians will make a new attempt next month to amend the law to give protection from prosecution to friends and family members who help a terminally ill person travel outside the United Kingdom for assisted suicide.
The ban on assisted suicide is forcing terminally ill people to cut their lives short, the House of Lords heard today as MS sufferer Debbie Purdy continued her controversial case to clarify the law at the UK's highest court.
An act by an individual ("D") is not to be treated as capable of encouraging or assisting the suicide or attempted suicide of another adult ("T") if— (a) the act is done solely or principally for the purpose of enabling or assisting T to travel to a country or territory in which assisted dying is lawful;
Debbie Purdy, who wants her husband to accompany her to Switzerland for an assisted suicide without fear of prosecution, took her case to the United Kingdom’s highest court, the House of Lords, for a final appeal this week. Ms Purdy, who has progressive multiple sclerosis, scored an important victory on the first day of the two day hearing, when the director of public prosecutions, Keir Starmer, conceded that article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, the right to respect for private life, applies to cases like hers.
Dignitas, which says that it is a nonprofit organisation, has not published its figures since 2004. Its rationale is that it is driven by its members (6,000 have signed up, 700 from Britain) and their desire to control the nature of their death. Yet even Ludwig Minelli, its director, admits that he rules like a “benign dictator”.
A woman with multiple sclerosis has made legal history by winning her battle to have the law on assisted suicide clarified. Debbie Purdy, 46, from Bradford, is considering going to Switzerland to end her life. She went to the House of Lords because she feared her husband, Omar Puente, could be prosecuted for helping her.
Decision on prosecution – the death by suicide of Daniel James, 9 December 2008. The detailed statement made by the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) in December 2008 that the family of Daniel James, who died in the Swiss clinic Dignitas in September 2008, would not face criminal charges marks a milestone in the development of the law as it applies in practice to assisted suicide. The DPP and, more recently, the judiciary 1 are arguably contributing to the tacit acceptance of assisted uicide abroad.
Assisting a person to commit suicide is still a criminal offence, the Law Lords insisted when they granted Debbie Purdy's appeal. As Lord Hope explained, it was not their job to change the law. "Our function as judges is to say what the law is and, if it is uncertain, to do what we can to clarify it." And that is just what they did.
Campaigner Debbie Purdy has called for an "open debate" on assisted suicide laws after her landmark court victory. Prosecutors are to clarify the law after Law Lords backed Ms Purdy's call for formal advice on the legal position of those who help a loved one to die.
The Swiss Government is considering new laws that are likely to make it harder for foreigners to travel to clinics, such as Dignitas, to get help to end their life. Recently the British conductor Edward Downes and his wife, Joan, used the services of Dignitas. Unlike his wife, Sir Edward, 85, did not have a terminal illness. In June the Swiss justice minister, Eveline Widmer-Schlumpf, announced that two different draft pieces of legislation would be considered in parliament this autumn. "One is a complete ban on assisted suicide, and one is the introduction of stricter, clearer legislation," she said. Currently it is legal in Switzerland to assist in a suicide unless it can be proved that the assistant has a selfish motive. Opinion polls have always shown that about two thirds of the population have a liberal attitude towards self determined death. But the Swiss are opposed to commercial assisted suicide and the cost to the nation of investigating cases.
The Swiss government is considering restricting or even banning organised assisted suicide in an attempt to reduce so-called "death tourism". Swiss authorities want to ensure euthanasia is a last resort for the terminally ill, amid fears their current laws on assisted suicide could be open to abuse. A study last year suggested more and more people seeking help to die in Switzerland did not have a terminal illness. "We have no interest, as a country, in being attractive for suicide tourism," the Swiss justice minister, Eveline Widmer-Schlumpf, told reporters in Berne, adding that more foreigners were travelling to Switzerland to die.
Switzerland's laws that prohibit killing continue to apply in full. Direct, active euthanasia (deliberate killing in order to end the suffering of another person) is therefore also forbidden. By contrast, both indirect, active euthanasia (the use of means having side-effects that may shorten life) and passive euthanasia (rejecting or discontinuing life-prolonging measures) – while not governed by any specific statutory provisions – are not treated as criminal offences provided certain conditions are fulfilled. No legislative action is needed with regard to these three forms of euthanasia. Legal restrictions and a ban on organised assisted suicide are nonetheless open to debate. They are intended to protect human life better, and to prevent organised assisted suicide becoming a profit-driven business.
Amongst the latest, and ever-changing, pathways of death and dying, “suicide tourism” presents distinctive ethical, legal and practical challenges. The international media report that citizens from across the world are travelling or seeking to travel to Switzerland, where they hope to be helped to die. In this paper I aim to explore three issues associated with this phenomenon: how to define “suicide tourism” and “assisted suicide tourism”, in which the suicidal individual is helped to travel to take up the option of assisted dying; the (il)legality of assisted suicide tourism, particularly in the English legal system where there has been considerable recent activity; and the ethical dimensions of the practice. I will suggest that the suicide tourist—and specifically any accomplice thereof—risks springing a legal trap, but that there is good reason to prefer a more tolerant policy, premised on compromise and ethical pluralism.