Seamus Burns commends the move towards greater transparency in assisted suicide cases
The unanimous and surprising ruling of the House of Lords in R (on the application of Purdy) v Director of Public Prosecutions [2009] UKHL 45, [2009] All ER (D) 335 (Jul) reignites the debate about whether assisted suicide should continue to be outlawed.
The decision requires the director of public prosecutions (DPP) to promulgate an offence-specific policy identifying the facts and circumstances which he will take into account in deciding, in a case like Ms Purdy’s, whether or not to give his consent, by virtue of s 2 (4) of the Suicide Act 1961 (SA 1961) to a prosecution under SA 61, s 2 (1).
The judgment represents a significant personal victory for Debbie Purdy, supporting her argument that the existing law is insufficiently clear to enable her to accurately predict if her husband is likely to be prosecuted with assisting in her suicide, at some time in the future.
Debbie Purdy suffers from primary progressive multiple sclerosis and the progressive nature of the disease
