Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Nicklinson Supreme Court judgement
In June 2014 the Supreme Court ruled on the joint appeals of the late Tony Nicklinson, Paul Lamb and a person identified only as Martin, on the status of UK law on assisted dying.1
As previously reported here,2 ,3 Tony Nicklinson had a catastrophic stroke in 2005, which left him with locked-in syndrome. Unable to end his life himself, he had for many years sought a declaration that it would be lawful for someone to assist him to do so. He died in 2012 from pneumonia, a week after an unsuccessful appeal to the High Court. His widow pursued his appeal to the Court of Appeal with Paul Lamb, who had been severely paralysed in a car accident in 1990. Their contention that UK law was incompatible with the right to a private life under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) was rejected by the Court of Appeal in July 2013 and the appeal was dismissed.
The Supreme Court, by a majority of seven to two, also dismissed the appeal. Although the majority ruled that the courts do have constitutional authority to make a declaration that UK law is incompatible with the ECHR, only two justices said they would exercise that authority in this case. Assisted dying was deemed to be a matter for Parliament, as the democratically elected legislature, owing to the complex issues of social policy and moral value-judgement involved.
While unwilling to make a declaration of incompatibility, many of the judgements indicated broad support for possible reform. In the leading judgement, Lord Neuberger noted that the ‘grave and significant’ interference with Article 8 rights could not necessarily be justified by the complete prohibition on assisted dying. He further noted that the arguments in favour of the current law were far …
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- How is COVID-19 changing the ways doctors make end-of-life decisions?
- Variation in local trust Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR) policies: a review of 48 English healthcare trusts
- Do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation (DNACPR) decisions for older medical inpatients: a cohort study
- When and how to discuss “do not resuscitate” decisions with patients
- Thirty-year trends in the prevalence and severity of female genital mutilation: a comparison of 22 countries
- Resuscitation decisions at the end of life: medical views and the juridification of practice
- Resuscitation policy should focus on the patient, not the decision
- Ethics briefing
- Female genital mutilation (FGM) in UK children: a review of a dedicated paediatric service for FGM
- Economic burden of female genital mutilation in 27 high-prevalence countries