Man Seeks Right to Die

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-10689294

This article is about a man who wishes to take his own life. The man, Tony Nicklinson, has been paralyzed from the neck down after suffering a stroke in 2005. He and his wife wish to pursue a means of helping him die without having his wife run the risk of being prosecuted for his murder. Nicholson cites his reason is he does not want to be stuck in this condition for the next twenty years, and states his reasons "I have no privacy or dignity left. I am washed, dressed and put to bed by carers who are, after all, still strangers." This article is extremely interesting to me because it reminds me of the controversy in the United States a few years ago with Terri Schiavo. Is the right to die a civil liberty, or can your government tell you when you can go and under which circumstances? Personally, I am a believer in the patient having a say in the matter, especially like in Nicklinson's case, where he is not just a vegetable and expressed his will to die through blinking to his wife. The idea of waking up every day to such an awful and depressing reality would make me want to take my own life as well, it seems like there is little joy in his life as he lays in the same bed day after day, unable to speak or communicate with the people he loves other than blinking or nodding to letters posted on a board. It must be traumatizing to witness the agony in your loved ones faces when they come and see you, for obviously the man is not blind to the world, he is just immobile and mute. Nicklinson questions whether or not he is grateful to the doctors in Athens who were able to save his life, or wonders if he had died that day he and his family would be much happier. The interesting thing about this article is the legal issues behind it. I am not for what Dr. Kevorkian and his 'assisted suicide' means with his patients, and think what he did was wrong. However, one must examine Nicklinson's case in a different light. He has requested to die, and I am sure if one of his arms was able to function, he might pull the plug himself, as awful as that sounds. He and his wife are in the middle of a legal battle to be able to put him out of his misery and are still nervous about her possibly being charged with murder. If a person asks you to kill them, gives you their permission, is that still as bad as killing in cold blood? It almost seems like a favor in this situation. I am sure that Nicklinson's medical bills alone would make me want to kill him, not to mention the fact that if I can see him suffering I would want to help. The analogy that comes to mind is seeing the dog whose hind legs and back have been crushed by a car. Obviously the animal is in pain, paralyzed and possibly with damage to its internal organs, not to mention it probably will never be able to walk again. The humane thing would be to shoot it and help it find peace. Clearly I am not suggesting that Jane Nicklinson take out her gun and shoot her husband in the face, but if the court rules against her plea to help her husband end his life, she may resort to desperate means. This article intrigues me because while one hears about controversial medical situations like these in the United States, it is not often that I consider the same situation in foreign countries, this one being England. Spain, being a very Roman Catholic country is probably against abortion and assisted suicide, but if a paralyzed husband and his distressed wife walked into your courtroom and looked to you to help them with his situation, how would you rule?