What are everyone's thoughts on this? I think a person who is in full possession of their facaulties and able to make decisions should be able to consent to someone ending their life, without that other person being held criminally responsible.'Locked-in syndrome' man's right-to-die case starts
The right-to-die case involves Tony Nicklinson, 58, from Wiltshire, who has locked-in syndrome following a stroke.
He is unable to take his own life and is seeking legal protection for any doctor who helps him end his life.
But the Ministry of Justice argues making such a ruling would authorise murder and change the law governing it. This legal bid differs from recent right-to-die cases which have focused on assisted suicide.
Instead, Mr Nicklinson's paralysis is so severe that he would have to be killed by someone else, known as euthansia.
The married father-of-two had a stroke in 2005 while on a business trip to Athens, leaving him paralysed, but with a fully-functioning mind. He has told the BBC his life is a "living nightmare" because he cannot speak and needs other people to do everything for him.
He said: "90% of itches have to be endured because by the time someone comes to scratch it and I have laboriously explained where it is, the itch has gone. Now I just put up with them. Or there is the screaming frustration of wanting to make a point but knowing that the only way I can express my opinion, by the board or computer, are useless in normal conversation."
He said he found it impossible to live with the knowledge that he had no way out when life got too much to bear because he was physically unable to take his own life.
"It cannot be acceptable in 21st century Britain that I am denied the right to take my own life just because I am physically handicapped," he said.
'Demeaning'
"We are all individuals and each person deserves an individual solution to his particular circumstances. A one-size-fits-all solution of better care and more of it, such as opponents advocate, is clearly not the answer. The option of assisted dying should be available."
The condition, known as locked-in syndrome, means Mr Nicklinson has to communicate through a special computer. He has argued that his life is "dull, miserable, demeaning, undignified and intolerable".
His legal action was launched to seek an assurance that a doctor could intervene to end his "indignity" and have a common law defence of necessity against any murder charge.
Mr Nicklinson's legal team will argue that the defence of necessity can be used against a murder charge - arguing that the only way to end his suffering is to allow him to die. They will also argue that his case is covered by Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights which deals with the right to respect for private and family life, our correspondent adds.
The hearing is expected to last four days, although a ruling will not be made until a later date.
However, this whole thing then raises the spectre of abuse - people could then kill other people and possibly claim that they were asked to. Vulnerable people, such as the elderly or disabled, might even be pressured into accepting suicide by relatives (if the person in question is in possession of a large financial estate, or for other reasons...) and that can't be a good thing.
Where do you stand?
If you had a sick dog no one would call you a murderer if you let him go to dogheaven. It ought to be the same with people. To die is a part of our life and if there is no life to live it is better if someone you love help you to die.
Doctors have secret codes for ending life of sick people. It is not called murder when someone only have some painful days left and huge amounts of morphia put them to sleep. Sometimes the doc talks to the relatives but not always.