Ethical Problem – Tony Nicklinson’s Legal Battle

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

The August 17, 2012 edition of the Daily Mail carried an article by Steve Doughty and Mario Ledwith, which was entitled “Tears of desperate locked-in syndrome sufferer Tony Nicklinson as High Court rules he can’t ask a doctor to end his life.” The article described Tony Nicklinson’s legal battle to get assistance to end his life.

He was a 58-year-old British citizen who worked as an engineer for a construction company in the Middle East. Nicklinson suffered from a severe stroke that made him unable to perform even basic tasks. He could not speak or move. He could only make small movements using his head and eyes. Nicklinson used a computer program to communicate using the little movements he could perform. Due to the ailment, he needed 24-hour care.

Before the illness, Nicklinson had a very active and rich for events life. The considered article contained several pictures that portrayed his active life prior to the disease. There are pictures of Nicklinson riding a quad bike, parachuting, and enjoying family moments. The ailment made Nicklinson’s life unbearable, so he claimed that the ailment had condemned him to “a life of increasing indignity and misery” (Doughty and Ledwith para 3). Therefore, the man sought assistance to end his life.

For two years Nicklinson had been trying to persuade the High Court judges to rule that “if, and when, he decides he wants to die, doctors will be immune from prosecution if they help him” (Doughty and Ledwith para 7). However, the judges denied his request. According to the High Court judges, only the British parliament could change the law on murder.

Therefore, it was illegal for anybody to assist Nicklinson to kill himself. The judges stated that Nicklinson could only perform a suicide through starvation. The ruling condemned Nicklinson to a life where he would be dependent on other people for all his needs. His wife, Jane, and his two daughters, Beth and Lauren, supported his quest too.

Tony Nicklinson cited Article eight of the European Human Rights Charter in asking the court to grant him the possibility of an assisted suicide. The prosecution joined Nicklinson’s case with that of another man who also had ‘locked-in syndrome’ but chose to remain anonymous. The judges ruled that the plight of the two men was ‘deeply moving’ as the men did not have control over their lives.

However, the law did not allow the judges to grant them their wishes. According to the judges, the decision to satisfy the men’s wishes would have far-reaching effects. Right to life campaigners supported the ruling. They claimed the ruling would put an end to a series of lawsuits on assisted suicide. Nicklinson vowed to appeal the ruling, however, he died a few days later due to pneumonia and starvation.

The article mentioned before highlights the dilemma that the judges faced. It is a fact that Nicklinson led a very uncomfortable life as it changed a lot after he started suffering from ‘locked-in’ syndrome. Nevertheless, the ailment relegated him to a life where he was dependant on other people for all his needs.

Undoubtedly, this made Nicklinson very uncomfortable, therefore, he sought assistance to end his life. It is worth mentioning that ending the life of another individual is morally and legally wrong. However, according to Tony Nicklinson, he did not deserve to lead the life he was experiencing. So, ending his life would alleviate the suffering that he endured on a daily basis.

People should engage in activities that have positive effects on other people. People should ensure that their activities lead to the happiness of as many people as possible. However, there are certain activities that have positive effects on some people and negative effects on others at the same time. As well, there are instances when the activity benefits many people but have a negative effect on the doer of it. This raises the question of whether it is ethical for an individual to engage in the activities in spite of the effect made.

Utilitarian ethics dictate that people should performed activities that bring happiness or joy to most people regardless of the personal preference of the individual. According to utilitarianism principles, the outcome of an action determines its morality. Utilitarianism holds that moral actions should bring happiness to the greatest number of people and the consequences of an action determine whether it is morally right or wrong (Edwards 38).

It is a fact that the law prohibited the judges from facilitating an assisted suicide. However, the law cannot be considered as fair. Tony Nicklinson had ‘locked-in’ syndrome that made him unable to undertake even basic tasks. The British law does not criminalize suicide but Nicklinson’s condition made him incapable of committing suicide. This prompted him to go to the court in order to obtain the right to have an assisted suicide and his family was supportive in his decision. Therefore, it was wrong for the court to deny his request.

According to utilitarian rules, the consequences of an action should lead to the greatest good. It is a fact that Tony Nicklinson has so much suffering. Therefore, granting him the right to have assisted suicide would ease the pain that he undergoes daily. The ailment caused mental anguish to Nicklinson’s family members. They had to take care of him daily as the ‘locked-in’ syndrome is incurable. This would have prolonged his suffering. Thus, assisted suicide is the only action that would have led to the greatest good for him.

Taking care of Nicklinson was emotionally draining to the family members as well. He was once an active individual who took care of his family. Family members supported his decision to have assisted suicide. Therefore, it was not morally wrong for the judge not to grant him his wishes.

Assisted suicide would have ended the suffering that the family had endured. Denying Tony Nicklinson the right to have an assisted suicide would have prolonged his suffering. However, it would have been wrong to give Nicklinson the right to commit an assisted suicide if his family did not support his decision. In addition, it would have been morally wrong to give Nicklinson the right to have an assisted suicide if he did not have a terminal illness.

The law should provide people who are in a situation that is similar to Tony Nicklinson’s the right to have an assisted suicide. The inability to do that forced the man to lead a life that he did not desire. In addition, such an outcome of the judges decision would have ended the mental anguish of his family.

Works Cited

Doughty, Steve and Mario Ledwith. “Tears of desperate locked-in syndrome sufferer Tony Nicklinson as High Court rules he CAN’T ask a doctor to end his life“. Daily Mail. 17.8 (2012). Web.

Edwards, Linda. A brief guide to beliefs: Ideas, theologies, mysteries, and movements. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2001. Print.

Click Here To Order Now!

Ethical Problem – Tony Nicklinson’s Legal Battle

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?

We have qualified writers to help you.

We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.

You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)