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.
Keir Starmer, the head of the Crown Prosecution Service, is to clarify whether people should be prosecuted for aiding a suicide following a landmark ruling by the Law Lords last week. It had been assumed that this guidance would affect only cases in which friends or relatives helped people to die abroad, such as at the Dignitas clinic in Zurich. However, in an interview with The Daily Telegraph, Mr Starmer said the “broad principles” of his new guidelines would apply equally to acts of assisted suicide planned and carried out at home.
A government source said: "Parliament is currently divided on this issue, but it may be that after Starmer produces his guidance, politicians will recognise that this is an ethical issue that cannot be left" to the Crown Prosecution Service alone.
A terminally ill patient confides in you his wish to pursue a path of assisted suicide.1 He asks you for information and support so that he can approach Dignitas and ultimately decide how and when he wishes to die. What would your response be? By providing a forum for discussion and supporting a patient’s decision would a doctor be assisting suicide or helping the patient to make an informed choice? Neither the BMA nor the General Medical Council offers any guidance on how a doctor should respond to a request for information about assisted suicide abroad. In contrast, I was clearly advised by the Medical Protection Society that “UK medical practitioners should refuse any involvement in the case of a patient wishing to discuss assisted dying, including the provision of medical reports or records that a patient might submit to Dignitas.” In addition, providing such information could be construed as constituting a criminal offence under section 2 of the Suicide Act 1961.
The director of public prosecutions (DPP) must spell out clearly his policy on prosecuting people in England and Wales who help friends or relatives go abroad for assisted suicide, the UK’s highest court has ruled. The unanimous judgment from five law lords is a victory for Debbie Purdy, who has primary progressive multiple sclerosis and wants her husband to help her travel to Switzerland—where assisted suicide is lawful—when she decides to die.
Lawyers seek clarification on role of UK doctors in assisted suicide: The UK Medical Protection Society says it will question MPs in the autumn on whether doctors may be prosecuted if they provide medical reports about a patient’s condition or fitness to travel knowing that this information will be passed to clinics such as Dignitas that help people end their life. They are also seeking clarification on whether doctors have a duty to report a patient’s intentions to the authorities.
Assisted suicide after the Lords’ decision in Purdy v DPP [2009] UKHL 45 remains a criminal offence under section 2(1) of the Suicide Act 1961. Whether the assisted suicide itself takes place within or outside the UK, assistance provided within the UK could be the subject of criminal prosecution. Any such prosecution would need the consent of the DPP. The House of Lords has asked the DPP to produce a policy structuring the discretion he exercises when deciding whether to consent to such a prosecution.
People who stand to benefit financially from a person’s death are likely to be the ones prosecuted for assisting a suicide, under guidelines to be issued this week. The law will remain unchanged but new rules will detail the factors that are likely to lead to a prosecution, the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) said yesterday. Keir Starmer, QC, drew them up after the law lords backed Debbie Purdy, a multiple sclerosis sufferer who called for a policy statement on whether people who helped someone to kill themselves should be prosecuted. The policy, which will be issued on Wednesday, will aim to clarify when individuals are more likely to be prosecuted or more likely not to be, he said.
Guidelines on assisted suicide law will be published by the Director of Public Prosecutions this week to clarify when people are likely to be prosecuted. Keir Starmer QC told the BBC factors that would be considered included whether anyone helping in the suicide stood to gain financially. He said assisted suicide would remain an offence as the law was unchanged.
LONDON — Assisted suicide has been illegal in England for nearly 50 years. But, ordered by the courts to clarify the law, the country’s top prosecutor on Wednesday set out a list of conditions under which his office would be unlikely to prosecute people who helped friends or relatives kill themselves.
Campaigners hailed the guidelines as a victory for common sense. But “right to life” groups said that he had exceeded his authority. Groups from the Law Society to Dignity in Dying insisted that Parliament should still legislate. Mr Starmer said the list of factors weighing in favour or against a prosecution did not mean that assisted suicide was no longer a criminal offence. Lord Falconer of Thoroton, a former Lord Chancellor and the first Justice Secretary, who tried recently to reform the law, hailed the DPP’s guidelines as a “very, very significant step” and said he had “unquestionably changed the law”. “He has done what the law lords ordered him to do — give certainty to people as to what will happen if they decide to help their loved ones to die.”
Plans to relax the laws on assisted suicide have been thrown into doubt after a group of lawyers questioned the role of Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, Britain’s most senior judge. Lawyers from campaign group the Christian Legal Centre want the advice to be put on hold because of Lord Phillips’ personal sympathy those calling for the rules on assisted suicide to be realxed, which emerged weeks after the judgement was handed down.
The DPP's interim guidance on assisted suicide prosecutions leaves many questions unanswered, says Penney Lewis Despite the publicity surrounding it, assisted suicide remains rare in the United Kingdom. Anonymous surveys of doctors suggest that it is non-existent, although voluntary euthanasia is carried out by doctors in a very small fraction of cases. There are cases of assistance by non-professionals, resulting in a small number of prosecutions for assisted suicide – 16 since April 2005, according to the DPP.
The House of Lords in Purdy forced the DPP to issue offence-specific guidance on assisted suicide, but Jacqueline A Laing argues that the resulting interim policy adopted last September is unconstitutional, discriminatory and illegal. In July 2009, the law lords in R (on the application of Purdy) v Director of Public Prosecutions [2009] All ER (D) 335 required that the DPP publish guidelines for those contemplating assisting another to commit suicide. The DPP produced a consultation paper (23 September 2009) seeking to achieve a public consensus, albeit outside Parliament, on the factors to be taken into account in determining when not to prosecute assisted suicide. Although the consultation exercise is hailed by proponents of legislative change as a democratic, consensus-building and autonomy-enhancing initiative, there is much to suggest that, on the contrary, the guidance is unconstitutional, arbitrary and at odds with human rights law, properly understood.
In a wallet on her kitchen table Debbie Purdy keeps the two pieces of plastic that will enable her to make her final journey. The Visa credit cards — one for her and one for her husband, Omar Puente — have a limit of £7,500. She has not spent a penny because she wants to keep them clear to pay for her death. “We don’t carry them with us because it’s only for use . . .” She stops short of referring specifically to the trip that she plans to make to the Dignitas assisted suicide clinic in Switzerland. “We haven’t really talked about the cards but we both have copies because I am worried that he will need it to get home and stuff like that.” We would not be having this conversation if Ms Purdy, who has multiple sclerosis, had not won a landmark legal victory last year forcing the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) to clarify the law on assisted suicide. “I would probably have been dead for six months at this point. It’s terrifying. I love being alive.”