header-logo header-logo

Lord Falconer backs Purdy on assisted suicide campaign

04 June 2009
Issue: 7372 / Categories: Legal News , Public , Human rights
printer mail-detail

Use of independent witnesses will guard against undue influence on patients

Multiple sclerosis sufferer Debbie Purdy is appealing to the House of Lords to clarify the law on assisted suicide and has been backed by the former lord chancellor, Lord Falconer, who was due to table an amendment in the House of Lords this week.

Purdy is seeking to ensure her husband will not be prosecuted if he travels with her to the Dignitas clinic in Switzerland for an assisted suicide.

Currently, the offence of aiding and abetting suicide attracts a maximum punishment of 14 years in prison.

The courts have previously said that it is up to Parliament to change the law.

Lord Falconer’s proposed amendment, to the Coroners and Justice Bill, will exempt relatives from prosecution as long as two GPs have certified a patient is terminally ill, and the individual has declared their intentions before an independent witness.

Dr Peter Gooderham, a law tutor at Cardiff University and a former medical doctor, says: “Lord Falconer makes a strong point that while the DPP has so far refrained from prosecuting about 100 people in this context, most have had to undergo police interviews.

“There is potentially much to be gained from establishing a legal exception to s 2 of the Suicide Act for relatives who help severely ill patients to end their lives. Such an exception might perhaps be similar to the exception to criminal liability contained in the Abortion Act 1967.”

“It will be desirable to allow for doctors to be ‘conscientious objectors’, subject to General Medical Council guidance on this point. It would be necessary for ‘terminally ill’ to be carefully defined in order to avoid uncertainty and abuse. The proposed  further safeguard of using an independent witness to certify the patient’s intention is likely to help guard against the exercise of undue influence on the patient.”

Issue: 7372 / Categories: Legal News , Public , Human rights
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
In NLJ this week, Bea Rossetto of the National Pro Bono Centre marks Pro Bono Week by urging lawyers to recognise the emotional toll of pro bono work
Can a lease legally last only days—or even hours? Professor Mark Pawlowski of the University of Greenwich explores the question in this week's NLJ
RFC Seraing v FIFA, in which the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) reaffirmed that awards by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) may be reviewed by EU courts on public-policy grounds, is under examination in this week's NLJ by Dr Estelle Ivanova of Valloni Attorneys at Law, Zurich
back-to-top-scroll