The 58-year-old father of two from Melksham,
Wiltshire, is mentally sound but paralysed from the neck down and unable to
speak.
For the past seven years he has not been able to move
anything apart from his head and eyes following a severe stroke while on a
business trip to Athens. His only means of communication is via a computer
triggered by blinks and head movements.
Mr Nicklinson has been battling for two years to
persuade three judges at the High Court to rule that if, and when, he decides
he wants to die, doctors will be immune from prosecution if they help him.
The judges gave him the devastating news that only
Parliament can change the law of murder so that doctors or helpers can step in
to assist someone to die. They added that if no doctor was allowed to help Mr
Nicklinson die, then his only option would be to die by starvation.
The ruling means that 58-year-old Mr Nicklinson faces
decades entirely dependent on others to care for his every need.
However his wife said they would appeal the judgement.
She and their grown-up daughters Lauren and Beth all support his legal battle.
Speaking through his computer, Mr Nicklinson said: ‘I
am devastated by the court’s decision.
‘Although I didn’t want to raise my hopes, it happened
anyway because a fantastic amount of work went into my case and I thought that
if the court saw me as I am, utterly miserable with my life, powerless to do
anything about it because of my disability, then the judges would accept my
reasoning that I do not want to carry on and should be able to have a dignified
death.
‘I am saddened that the law wants to condemn me to a
life of increasing indignity and misery.’
Mrs Nicklinson, 56, said: ‘Tony has to either carry on
like this until he dies of natural causes or starves himself.’
Right-to-life campaigners said the ruling would
protect the vulnerable from pressure to commit suicide or from involuntary
euthanasia.
Mr Nicklinson’s case was a joint one with a
47-year-old known only as Martin because his family wishes to preserve their
privacy.
He suffered a stroke four years ago and is unable to
speak or move, except for small movements of his head and eyes.
Lord Justice Toulson, sitting with Mr Justice Royce
and Mrs Justice Macur, rejected the claim of both men that they should be
allowed help with death under Article Eight of the European human rights
charter, which guarantees the right to private and family life.
Martin’s claim that the Director of Public
Prosecutions must be asked to publish new guidelines allowing others to help
him die was also rejected.
Lord Justice Toulson described the men’s cases as
‘tragic’.
He said their plight was ‘deeply moving’, but added:
‘their desire to have control over the ending of their lives demands the most
careful and sympathetic consideration, but there are also other important
issues to consider.
‘A decision to allow their claims would have
consequences far beyond the present cases.
‘It is not for the court to decide whether the law
about assisted dying should be changed and, if so, what safeguards should be
put in place.
‘Under our system of government these are matters for
Parliament to decide, representing society as a whole, after Parliamentary
scrutiny, and not for the court on the facts of an individual case or cases.’
It confirms the view that even in a free democratic
society there are limits to choice. Every law limits choice and stops some
people doing what they might desperately wish to do, but this is necessary in
order to protect others, especially the most vulnerable in our society.
‘Hopefully the decision to reject both cases will now
draw a line once and for all under legal debate and allow decision-makers and
society to focus attention on how we care for the terminally ill and severely
disabled.
No comments:
Post a Comment