|
Challenge
In British Court Gives Patient Right To Die
 |
| Like
Miss B, Diane Pretty wants to have the legal right to end
her life |
LONDON,
March 23 (IslamOnline & News Agencies) - A severely paralysed
woman Friday won an historic legal challenge for the right to die,
against the wishes of her doctors, after an ethically tangled battle
through the British courts, news agencies reported.
A
High Court judge in London ruled that the 43-year-old woman, known
only as Miss B, had the right to tell doctors to switch off the
life-support machine that has kept her alive for a year. They also
awarded Miss B 100 pounds (142 dollars, 162 euros) in nominal
damages against the hospital for “unlawful tresspass,” for being
kept alive so far against her wishes.
It
is the first case of its kind in Britain, as previous right-to-die
legal challenges have involved people either in a coma without
prospect of recovery, or suffering a terminal condition.
Judge
Elizabeth Butler-Sloss said the ruling meant Miss B's life could end
“peacefully and with dignity”.
Friday's
ruling was unusual as the judge gave it via a three-way video link
between Birmingham, central England, the court in London and the
woman in hospital.
The
doctors had argued that turning off her ventilator would go against
all their ethical training and she should try rehabilitation,
although they admitted she had a less than one percent chance of
recovery.
Miss
B, was born in Jamaica and moved to Britain when she was eight, and
is unmarried with no children.
She
is paralysed from the neck down and has been unable to move or
breathe unaided since rupturing a blood vessel in her neck a year
ago.
In
a different case, Diane Pretty is also going through a legal battle
to allow her husband to help her end her life in the European Court
of Human Rights.
Pretty
suffers motor neurone disease and may only have months to live. She
says she wants to be able to die with dignity.
Islam’s
stance is very clear on this issue and divides euthanasia into two
categories: active euthanasia and passive euthanasia. The first
refers to an act that leads to death, like giving a patient a fatal
injection to hasten his death.
The
latter is the negative attitude taken to hasten death for the
patient; this can be by withholding or withdrawing water, food,
drugs, medical or surgical procedures, resuscitation like CPR, and
life support such as the respirator. The patient is then left to die
from the underlying disease.
Some
Muslim scholars maintain that all types of euthanasia are forbidden
as they run counter to noble principles of Islamic Jurisprudence
that are deducted from the textual evidence, i.e. from the Qur’an
and the Prophet’s Tradition.
Prominent
Muslim scholar Sheikh Yousef al-Qaradawi states that positive
euthanasia or so-called “mercy killing” is forbidden in Islam as
it encompasses a positive role on the part of the physician to end
the life of the patient and hasten his death via lethal injection,
electric shock, a sharp weapon or any other way. This is an act of
murder, and murder is a major sin in Islam, the religion of pure
mercy.
As
for the suspension of medical treatment via preventing the patient
from his due medication which, from a medical perspective is,
thought to be useless, is permissible and is sometimes even
recommended. Thus, the physician can do this for the sake of the
patient’s comfort and the relief of his family.
Egyptian
Islamic thinker Tarek al-Bishry told IslamOnline that euthanasia is
forbidden by all religions and man-made laws.
He
said this is a new and unnatural concept and is widely opposed.
“How long a person lives is solely determined by God and no-one
should interfere in this process of life and death,” Al-Bishry
said.
Al-Bishry
stated that no one -- not even the doctor -- should be allowed to
determine the patient's life span. He said the doctor’s only
purpose is to treat patients and to relieve pain without resorting
to fatal means.
Muzammil
Siddiqi, an Islamic scholar, said: “The sick person should
patiently endure the pain and pray to Allah. If he/she is patient,
there will be a great reward and blessing for him/her in the eternal
life.”
If,
however, a number of medical experts determine that a patient is in
a terminal condition and there is no hope for his/her recovery, then
it could be permissible for them to stop the medication.
If
the patient is on life support, it may be permissible, with due
consultation and care, to decide to switch off the life support
machine and let nature take its own time.
Under
no condition is it permissible to induce death to a patient.
In
many countries, however, the practice is implicitly allowed, some
turning a blind eye to "assisted suicide", but many others
refuse to countenance any legal framework for "active
euthanasia".
The
Netherlands became the first country in the world to legalise
euthanasia under certain conditions in April 2001, although the law
will not come into force until April 1. The practice had been
tolerated since 1997. But in a landmark case in December an
Amsterdam appeals court ruled that being "tired of living"
did not constitute a legitimate reason for mercy killing.
A
doctor who acted out of compassion for an 86-year-old patient did,
however, escape a jail sentence. Several other countries in
Europe allow some form of mercy killing.
In
Sweden "suicide assistance" is a non-punishable offence. A
doctor can, in extreme cases, unplug life support machines.
Denmark
allows any patient with an incurable disease to make up his or her
mind to decide when to stop vital treatment. Since October 1, 1992,
patients with terminal illnesses or victims of serious accidents can
make out a "medical will" which doctors are bound to
respect.
In
France, euthanasia is illegal, but the law does distinguish between
active euthanasia -- the deliberate act of causing death, regarded
as murder -- and passive euthanasia or "therapeutic
abstention" -- regarded as refusing to medically prolong the
life functions of a patient.
Current
Health Minister Bernard Kouchner caused outrage in certain circles
last July when he admitted in a Dutch magazine interview that as a
young doctor, he had practised euthanasia during the wars in Lebanon
and Vietnam.
Under
British law euthanasia is illegal. However, in 1993 and 1994 the
courts did grant leave to doctors to end the lives of people
artificially kept alive. In June 1996 a patient in Scotland was
"authorised to die."
United
States federal law forbids euthanasia. In November 1998, voters in
the state of Michigan refused to legalise "assisted
suicide" in a referendum.
Oregon
is the only U.S. state to authorise euthanasia, in 1994, for
terminally ill patients who formally request it. However, because a
court opposed its enforcement, it has never been practised. In
April 1996, the federal appeals court in New York, which has
jurisdiction over the states of Vermont and Connecticut, authorised
euthanasia.
|
