Locked-in syndrome sufferer wins high court hearing for his right to die - The Guardian

A man with locked-in syndrome who wants his "dull, miserable, demeaning, undignified and intolerable" life to end has won the right to have his case decided by the high court.

Tony Nicklinson, 57, was left paralysed below the neck after a stroke seven years ago and can now communicate only by blinking or through limited head movement.

He is seeking the legal right for a doctor to intervene to end his "indignity" and have a "common law defence of necessity" against any murder charge.

Monday's ruling by Mr Justice Charles followed an application by the Ministry of Justice for the case to be struck out on the grounds that Nicklinson's plea was a matter for parliament rather than the courts.

But the judge allowed most of Nicklinson's action to proceed, ruling that he had an "arguable" case to go before a full court.

After the ruling Nicklinson's wife, Jane, a former nurse, read out a statement from her husband on BBC Radio 5 Live.

It said: "I'm delighted that the issues surrounding assisted dying are to be aired in court. Politicians and others can hardly complain with the courts providing the forum for debate if the politicians continue to ignore one of the most important topics facing our society today.

"It's no longer acceptable for 21st-century medicine to be governed by 20th-century attitudes to death."

Nicklinson's solicitor, Saimo Chahal, said information would now be obtained on "the practical steps" that would have to be taken to end Nicklinson's life, and put before the court.

Nicklinson, from Melksham, Wiltshire, suffered a massive stroke in 2005 while on a business trip to Greece.

His wife told the Falconer inquiry into assisted suicide in December 2010 that her husband was someone who used to love conversation but now cried with frustration at the "sheer agony" of being unable to speak.

On Monday she told BBC Radio 4's Today programme that death was his only way out.

"We are asking for it to be legal for someone to end his life. The only way to relieve Tony's suffering is to kill him. There's nothing else that can be done for him," she said.

"He can't do anything. He's completely paralysed and he can't speak. If he has an itch I have to scratch it for him."

In his written ruling, the judge included Nicklinson's first statement in the proceedings, in which he explained his predicament and argued that he should not be denied the right to die.

"I have locked-in syndrome and I can expect no cure or improvement in my condition as my muscles and joints seize up through lack of use," he said. "Indeed, I can expect to dribble my way into old age. If I am lucky I will acquire a life-threatening illness such as cancer so that I can refuse treatment and say no to those who would keep me alive against my will.

"By all means protect the vulnerable; by vulnerable I mean those who cannot make decisions for themselves. Just don't include me. I am not vulnerable. I don't need help or protection from death or those who would help me."

He added: "Why should I be denied a right – the right to die of my own choosing – when able-bodied people have that right and only my disability prevents me from exercising that right?"

The judge gave Nicklinson the go-ahead to take his case further in judicial review proceedings in relation to two of three declarations sought. He said the underlying issues in the case "raise questions that have great social, ethical and religious significance and they are questions on which widely differing beliefs and views are held, often strongly".

The circumstances in which Nicklinson and his family find themselves were ones that "evoke deepest sympathy", he said. Nicklinson would be seeking a declaration that "it would not be unlawful on the grounds of necessity for Mr Nicklinson's GP, or another doctor, to terminate or assist the termination of Nicklinson's life".

The judge also gave permission in relation to a second declaration sought by Nicklinson over his right to respect for private life under article 8 of the human rights convention. He said Nicklinson accepted that "what he is seeking to do is to change the existing understanding of the common law".