This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/jun/27/assisted-dying-uk-court-rejects-noel-conway-challenge

The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 1 Version 2
Terminally ill Noel Conway loses challenge to assisted dying ban Terminally ill Noel Conway loses challenge to assisted dying ban
(7 months later)
A terminally ill man with motor neurone disease who wants the right to an assisted death has lost his legal challenge at the UK court of appeal.A terminally ill man with motor neurone disease who wants the right to an assisted death has lost his legal challenge at the UK court of appeal.
Noel Conway, 68, a retired lecturer from Shrewsbury who says he feels “entombed” by his illness, has fought a long legal battle for the right to a “peaceful and dignified” death. He said he would continue his campaign after losing his case on Wednesday.Noel Conway, 68, a retired lecturer from Shrewsbury who says he feels “entombed” by his illness, has fought a long legal battle for the right to a “peaceful and dignified” death. He said he would continue his campaign after losing his case on Wednesday.
He wanted to be allowed help to die – which the law prevents – when he has less than six months to live and still has the mental capacity to make the “voluntary, clear, settled and informed” decision.He wanted to be allowed help to die – which the law prevents – when he has less than six months to live and still has the mental capacity to make the “voluntary, clear, settled and informed” decision.
He proposed that he could only receive assistance to die if a high court judge determined that he met all three of those criteria. Conway challenged an earlier high court rejection of his case at a hearing in May.He proposed that he could only receive assistance to die if a high court judge determined that he met all three of those criteria. Conway challenged an earlier high court rejection of his case at a hearing in May.
But his case was rejected by three senior judges – the master of the rolls, Sir Terence Etherton, Sir Brian Leveson and Lady Justice King.But his case was rejected by three senior judges – the master of the rolls, Sir Terence Etherton, Sir Brian Leveson and Lady Justice King.
Reading a summary of the ruling, Etherton said the court had concluded it was not as well-placed as parliament to determine the “necessity and proportionality of a blanket ban”.Reading a summary of the ruling, Etherton said the court had concluded it was not as well-placed as parliament to determine the “necessity and proportionality of a blanket ban”.
He said the court had seen evidence to suggest Conway’s proposed scheme was “inadequate to protect the weak and vulnerable” and failed to give enough weight to the “significance of the sanctity of life and to the scheme’s potential to undermine trust and confidence as between doctors and patients”.He said the court had seen evidence to suggest Conway’s proposed scheme was “inadequate to protect the weak and vulnerable” and failed to give enough weight to the “significance of the sanctity of life and to the scheme’s potential to undermine trust and confidence as between doctors and patients”.
Etherton added: “From the outset, we emphasise our great respect for him [Conway] and for the dignity and courage which he has shown.”Etherton added: “From the outset, we emphasise our great respect for him [Conway] and for the dignity and courage which he has shown.”
Conway said he intended to take his case to the supreme court. He said: “I am naturally disappointed by today’s judgment, though it was not unexpected. I fully intend to appeal it with the support of my legal team.Conway said he intended to take his case to the supreme court. He said: “I am naturally disappointed by today’s judgment, though it was not unexpected. I fully intend to appeal it with the support of my legal team.
“I will keep fighting for myself and all terminally ill people who want the right to die peacefully, with dignity and on our own terms. I want to thank my family, friends and members of the public who have shown such overwhelming support and who continue to spur me on in this fight.”“I will keep fighting for myself and all terminally ill people who want the right to die peacefully, with dignity and on our own terms. I want to thank my family, friends and members of the public who have shown such overwhelming support and who continue to spur me on in this fight.”
Conway, who is supported by the campaign group Dignity in Dying, was too unwell to travel to London for the hearing. He is dependent on a ventilator for up to 23 hours a day and only has movement in his right hand, head and neck.Conway, who is supported by the campaign group Dignity in Dying, was too unwell to travel to London for the hearing. He is dependent on a ventilator for up to 23 hours a day and only has movement in his right hand, head and neck.
Conway cites his options as to “effectively suffocate” by choosing to remove his ventilator or spend thousands travelling to Switzerland to end his life and have his family risk prosecution.Conway cites his options as to “effectively suffocate” by choosing to remove his ventilator or spend thousands travelling to Switzerland to end his life and have his family risk prosecution.
He said: “This illness has already taken away my ability to breathe independently and I am now almost completely immobile. I know it will also rob me of my life, and I have accepted that. But what I cannot accept are the options I am faced with under the current law.He said: “This illness has already taken away my ability to breathe independently and I am now almost completely immobile. I know it will also rob me of my life, and I have accepted that. But what I cannot accept are the options I am faced with under the current law.
“I am told that I can choose between letting nature take its course until I am completely unable to move or communicate; hastening my death by removing my ventilator with no guarantee my suffering can be completely relieved; attempting to end my own life at home in potentially painful and traumatic circumstances; or making the arduous and expensive journey to Dignitas and risking prosecution for any loved ones who accompany me.“I am told that I can choose between letting nature take its course until I am completely unable to move or communicate; hastening my death by removing my ventilator with no guarantee my suffering can be completely relieved; attempting to end my own life at home in potentially painful and traumatic circumstances; or making the arduous and expensive journey to Dignitas and risking prosecution for any loved ones who accompany me.
“It is barbaric to force me to decide between these unacceptable options.”“It is barbaric to force me to decide between these unacceptable options.”
Conway’s appeal was opposed by the government, with Humanists UK, Care Not Killing and Not Dead Yet UK also making submissions.Conway’s appeal was opposed by the government, with Humanists UK, Care Not Killing and Not Dead Yet UK also making submissions.
Dr Peter Saunders, a campaign director of Care Not Killing, said: “This sensible decision by the court of appeal yet again recognises that the safest law is the one we already have – a complete ban on assisted suicide and euthanasia.”Dr Peter Saunders, a campaign director of Care Not Killing, said: “This sensible decision by the court of appeal yet again recognises that the safest law is the one we already have – a complete ban on assisted suicide and euthanasia.”
Assisted dyingAssisted dying
Court of appealCourt of appeal
Motor neurone diseaseMotor neurone disease
newsnews
Share on FacebookShare on Facebook
Share on TwitterShare on Twitter
Share via EmailShare via Email
Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn
Share on PinterestShare on Pinterest
Share on Google+
Share on WhatsAppShare on WhatsApp
Share on MessengerShare on Messenger
Reuse this contentReuse this content