Skip to content
Tony Nicklinson is severely paralysed and can communicate only by blinking and making very slight head movements
Tony Nicklinson
Update by news editor   17-08-2012

Locked-in man loses court battle

Stroke victim 'heartbroken and devastated' after losing right to die case

A severely paralysed man has lost a court battle to be allowed to end his life with the help of a doctor.

Tony Nicklinson, 58, has suffered from locked-in syndrome since having a massive stroke in 2005. He cannot speak and can hardly move but his mind still works normally. He describes his life as "pure torture".

He went to court to try to win the right to end his life when he chooses with a doctor's help. But three judges concluded that anybody who helped Mr Nicklinson to die could be found guilty of murder.

The judges said they felt sorry for Mr Nicklinson and that his situation was "deeply moving and tragic". But they said it would be against the law to help him end his life. It was Parliament's job to decide to change the law, not the court's, they explained.

Mr Nicklinson was very active and outgoing before a stroke left him paralysed from the neck down. He can communicate only by blinking and slightly moving his head.

"I need help in almost every aspect of my life," he said. "I cannot scratch if I itch. I cannot pick my nose if it is blocked and I can only eat if I am fed like a baby - only I won't grow out of it, unlike a baby."

Mr Nicklinson could live like this for another 20 years or more.

After the court's decision he said he was devastated and that he had been sentenced to a life of misery. He plans to appeal against the verdict.

 

Click here to see some arguments for and against assisted suicide.

Lesson ideas and suggestions

Join the Daily What News Facebook group

Watch us LIVE on Glow TV

Locked-in man loses court battle

A question of life and death: but who should decide?

The plight of Tony Nicklinson is beyond the imagination of those of us fortunate enough to be able-bodied and able to communicate.

A globe-trotting engineer, he suffered a massive stroke seven years ago. He was left paralysed and able to "speak" only by nodding or blinking at an alphabet board. He needs help with every other bodily function or movement. He has come to view it as a living death, or "pure torture", and a doctor to be able to give him a lethal injection without risking being charged with murder.

His case has re-opened a highly charged debate.

At its heart is the age old question: whose life is it anyway?

Some believe that life is given by God and can only be ended at a moment determined by its creator. Others want the freedom to decide when their existence is no longer tolerable.

These decisions are very complex. People experience and tolerate pain differently, and pain relief works better for some than for others.

Temperaments are variable. Some people can accept massive limitations to their normal lifestyle. Others go mad with frustration and resentment.

No other human can second guess the state of mind or level of despair.

Opponents of assisted suicide argue that people can feel suicidal for a short time and can be given support to help them beat depression. Others suggest that changing the existing law puts the lives of disabled people in danger from the actions of others, perhaps relatives, whose motives may be suspect.

Tony Nicklinson's case is made the more difficult by the fact that he cannot end his life by himself.

Even Dignity in Dying, an organisation that campaigns for the law on assisted dying to be changed, argues only for those who are terminally ill with six or fewer months to live.

That would exclude Tony Nicklinson, whose condition is open ended and not of itself painful, but who wants to die. Whose life is it anyway?

 

Click here to see some arguments for and against assisted suicide.

Lesson ideas and suggestions

Join the Daily What News Facebook group

Watch us LIVE on Glow TV

 

adapted from article by John Aston and Rod Minchin
read original story here

Experiences & Outcomes

  • I can use evidence selectively to research current social, political or economic issues. SOC 2-15a
  • I can use my knowledge of current social, political or economic issues to interpret evidence and present an informed view. SOC 3-15a
  • I can evaluate conflicting sources of evidence to sustain a line of argument. SOC 4-15a
  • I am developing my understanding that people have beliefs and values based upon religious or other positions. RME 2-09b
  • I am developing my own understanding of values such as honesty, respect and compassion and am able to identify how these values might be applied in relation to moral issues. RME 3-09b
  • I am able to apply my understanding of a range of moral viewpoints, including those which are independent of religion, to specific moral issues and am aware of the diversity of moral viewpoints held in modern Scotland and the wider world. RME 4-09b
  • I can apply philosophical enquiry to explore questions or ethical issues. RME 4-09e