Attempts to nibble away at the extent of UK legislation on end-of-life matters are becoming ever more daring and more dangerous.After attempts to legalise assisted suicide failed and campaigner Debbie Purdy wanted an assurance that her husband would not be prosecuted if he accompanied her to a Swiss suicide clinic, Director of Public Prosecutions Keir Starmer, required to state when prosecutions could be expected, announced prosecution for assisted suicide would be unlikely if it was "wholly motivated by compassion," thus permitting assisted suicide under certain circumstances.
Now the High Court is to be asked for a decision on what should happen where cases of murder are "wholly motivated by compassion."
Tony Nicklinson, a 56-year-old father of two from Chippenham, Wiltshire, has been paralysed for five years following a severe stroke. He is fed through a tube, is able to move only his head and his eyes, and communicates by nodding or blinking at letters on a perspex board.
He says he has no privacy or dignity left, is "fed up" with life and does not wish to continue living. He is said to be physically unable to commit suicide, and if his 54-year-old wife Jan did what was necessary to end his life, she would technically be open to a charge of murder. Murder carries a mandatory life sentence.
Mr Nicklinson, who is supported by the former Voluntary Euthanasia Society, is said to want clarity on how the law of murder applies in cases of genuine "mercy killing" so he can understand the implications for his wife.
His lawyers will argue that the law against murder interferes with his rights to autonomy under the European Convention on Human Rights.
Human rights legislation, originally intended to protect people's right to life, now appears to be being used to support a right to die.
Pro-lifers say weakening the law could leave vulnerable people without adequate legal protection. It could also lead to a belief that the lives of disabled people are of less worth than others.
