or assisted suicide is morally accepted under this doctrine once Sarahs husband or any of her relatives agrees. In the case of Ms B v An NHS Trust, doctors refused to switch off the ventilator that kept her alive for ethical reasons, despite being pronounced capable of making a decision on whether or not to continue her medical treatment. Based on this doctrine, Sarah may argue that since she would be experiencing severe pain during the final stages of her illness she should be assisted to die. In R (Pretty) v DPP, Diane Pretty who suffered motor neurone disease wanted to end her life due to the pains and suffering she endured because of her illness. Kevorkians attorney, Geoffrey. Sarah has the option of preparing an advance decision stating the kind of treatment she would like to receive in the very final stage of her disease. Sanctity of life versus quality of life. It was held that Article 2 impressed a duty on the state to protect life. Hence these autonomous decisions are not carefully thought-out. As argued by Craig Paterson, It is always and everywhere wrong to kill an innocent person regardless of any further appeal to consequences or motive.
According to Kevorkians attorney,. Medical technology today has achieved remarkable feats in prolonging the lives of human beings. It is sad to realize that these people are in great agony and that to them the only hope of bringing that agony to a halt is through assisted suicide. Depending on religious beliefs, it may be ethically right or wrong under this doctrine for Sarahs doctor or husband to assist her in committing suicide. Of course, most families do not consider the cost while the terminally ill loved-one is still alive.