Posted on 05/16/2005 12:37:28 PM PDT by QQQQQ
LONDON (Reuters) - The General Medical Council (GMC) went to court on Monday to clarify how much treatment should be given to terminally ill patients.
Last year 45-year-old Leslie Burke, who has a degenerative brain condition, won a court ruling to stop doctors letting him starve to death should he become too ill to feed himself or communicate.
Lawyers for the GMC told the Appeal Court on Monday that there was no reason to suppose that Burke would not be allowed to die naturally.
"There is nothing to suggest that Mr Burke will not be provided with the artificial nutrition and hydration he wishes to be provided with when he requires it, which hopefully will be many years hence," GMC counsel Philip Havers told the court.
Last year's ruling criticised the GMC's guidelines on dealing with terminally ill patients, which in certain circumstances give doctors the final decision on treatment.
The ruling said doctors should obtain court permission before withdrawing life-support and said many sections of the guidelines were unlawful.
The GMC, a public body established in 1858 to protect patients' interests, said it was appealing the ruling because the judgement left some key issues unclear.
"Doctors want clear guidance to help ensure individual patients receive the care that's right for them. That's why we are appealing the judgement," the GMC said in a statement.
Burke said on Monday he was not asking for his life to be extended by radical treatment.
"I just do not want to effectively die of starvation and thirst which may take up to two weeks. I want as far as possible to be able to approach the end of my life with dignity," he told Sky News.
The hearing is scheduled to last for three days, with the Appeal Court expected to reserve judgment until a later date.
So the right to die morphs into the duty to die whether you want to or not.
And a very short morphing it was, too.
***********
We owe it to the State not to bankrupt her assets, don't you know.
However, a ruling in London does not apply to the USA.
Did you read the piece?
It's about a guy himself
choosing the methods
he wants put in place
in his own case. He doesn't
want a dragged-out end.
Last year 45-year-old Leslie Burke, who has a degenerative brain condition, won a court ruling to stop doctors letting him starve to death should he become too ill to feed himself or communicate.
****************
My understanding is that he does not want to die like Terri Schiavo.
apparently you have missed the latest trends in court rulings... that of international law and precedent. haven't you seen the courts lately basing decisions on what happens in other countries???
apparently you have missed the latest trends in court rulings... that of international law and precedent. haven't you seen the courts lately basing decisions on what happens in other countries???
we need to watch what happens in the courts of other countries, it could come back and bite us in the butt!
I read this to mean
he wants his euthanasia
to be effective
and quick, rather than
drawn out, but probably I'm
mis-reading the gist . . .
What I am reading into his interview is that he does not want any medical treatment, but he does not want to starve and dehydrate to death.
************
Yes, I can understand that. The article was poorly written, in my opinion.
I agree with trisham.
It seems like the DEFAULT is to starve and dehydrate people to death, who can't defend themselves. This guy does NOT like that default, that's why he brought his suit, while he is still able to, so as to keep doctors from doing that to him later.
Nowhere in the article does it say, that he wants to be euthanized quickly by some other method, instead. He wants to die, when it's time, not when the doctors decide it's time. He wants to keep doctors from automatically killing him by withholding food and water, when he isn't able to defend himself.
Apparently you have to sue, to force doctors to keep you alive.
ping
You need to visit
a hospital. In our world
modern medicine
keeps more folk alive
than ever in history.
Senior citizens
get amazing work
from all sorts of specialists.
Doctors and nurses
work profoundly hard
to keep everyone alive.
It's sad and corrupt
of Terri addicts
to pervert the one issue
of terminal care
and pretend it means
all of modern medicine.
It's a mental glitch.
*************
Well said.
That's the slope we're sliding down, it seems.
I can't believe Leslie Burke won his court battle last year and now will have to again fight for the RIGHT TO LIVE, due to the GMC's appeal. What has this world come to when a person feels the need to go to court because he is scared he might be killed by the removal of food and water.
It's clear Mr Burke is NOT for euthanasia, but wants to LIVE. Here is a link to his website:
http://www.willtolive.co.uk/les_burke/main/
I pray the court will rule in Burke's favor once again. It's insane that the GMC, an organization established to protect patient's interests, is putting Burke through this ordeal and torment. Just goes to show things are not always as though they appear.
Thanks for the article.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.