this has me bawling, crying solid tears. this is awful. this poor man. if i was in his position i would want it to be over.
http://au.news.yahoo.com/queensland/...gal-challenge/Britain's High Court has rejected an attempt by a man who has locked-in syndrome to overturn the country's euthanasia law by refusing to legally allow doctors to end his life.
Tony Nicklinson had a stroke in 2005 that left him unable to speak or move below his neck. He requires constant care and communicates mostly by blinking, although his mind has remained unaffected and his condition is not terminal.
In January, the 58-year-old asked the High Court to declare that any doctor who kills him with his consent will not be charged with murder.
The High Court ruled that challenges from Nicklinson and another man named only as Martin to allow others to help them die without being prosecuted were a matter for parliament to decide.
Nicklinson said he was "devastated and heartbroken" and planned to appeal Thursday's decision.
"I am saddened that the law wants to condemn me to a life of increasing indignity and misery," he said in a statement.
Martin, 47, also has locked-in syndrome and asked for the court to allow professionals to help him die either by withholding food and water or by helping him go to a clinic in Switzerland to die. His wife said she respects his wishes, but does not want to help kill him.
Locked-in syndrome is a rare neurological disorder where patients are completely paralysed, and only able to blink. Patients are conscious and don't have any intellectual problems, but they are unable to speak or move.
The judges wrote that they were both "tragic cases", but said to allow euthanasia as a possible defence to murder "would usurp the proper role of parliament".
Nicklinson had argued that British law violated his right to "private and family life" as guaranteed by the European Convention on Human Rights, on the grounds that being able to choose how to die is a matter of personal autonomy. He has previously described his life as "a living nightmare".
Legal experts weren't surprised by the ruling.
"The feeling seems to be that only parliament could give adequate thought to what sort of law should be in place and the safeguards required," said Richard Huxtable, deputy director of the Ethics in Medicine department at Bristol University.