Escaping the shackles of law at the end of life: R (Nicklinson) v Ministry of Justice [2012] EWHC 2381 (Admin).
This commentary discusses the decision in R (Nicklinson) v Ministry of Justice;(1) it will argue that the court should have allowed the use of the defence of necessity. It argues that the official response of the law should be to outlaw euthanasia or assisted suicide, but also to recognise that in e...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Journal article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
2013
|
| _version_ | 1826297869847494656 |
|---|---|
| author | Herring, J |
| author_facet | Herring, J |
| author_sort | Herring, J |
| collection | OXFORD |
| description | This commentary discusses the decision in R (Nicklinson) v Ministry of Justice;(1) it will argue that the court should have allowed the use of the defence of necessity. It argues that the official response of the law should be to outlaw euthanasia or assisted suicide, but also to recognise that in exceptional circumstances these should be permitted. The use of the defence of necessity permits this nuanced response to the issue. The commentary also argues that the treatment of suicidal and elderly people is a far more important issue than creating the correct legal response to assisted dying. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-07T04:38:12Z |
| format | Journal article |
| id | oxford-uuid:d0b585e2-a5af-4ef5-8672-7b5cbc7ec49c |
| institution | University of Oxford |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-07T04:38:12Z |
| publishDate | 2013 |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | oxford-uuid:d0b585e2-a5af-4ef5-8672-7b5cbc7ec49c2022-03-27T07:51:50ZEscaping the shackles of law at the end of life: R (Nicklinson) v Ministry of Justice [2012] EWHC 2381 (Admin).Journal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bcuuid:d0b585e2-a5af-4ef5-8672-7b5cbc7ec49cEnglishSymplectic Elements at Oxford2013Herring, JThis commentary discusses the decision in R (Nicklinson) v Ministry of Justice;(1) it will argue that the court should have allowed the use of the defence of necessity. It argues that the official response of the law should be to outlaw euthanasia or assisted suicide, but also to recognise that in exceptional circumstances these should be permitted. The use of the defence of necessity permits this nuanced response to the issue. The commentary also argues that the treatment of suicidal and elderly people is a far more important issue than creating the correct legal response to assisted dying. |
| spellingShingle | Herring, J Escaping the shackles of law at the end of life: R (Nicklinson) v Ministry of Justice [2012] EWHC 2381 (Admin). |
| title | Escaping the shackles of law at the end of life: R (Nicklinson) v Ministry of Justice [2012] EWHC 2381 (Admin). |
| title_full | Escaping the shackles of law at the end of life: R (Nicklinson) v Ministry of Justice [2012] EWHC 2381 (Admin). |
| title_fullStr | Escaping the shackles of law at the end of life: R (Nicklinson) v Ministry of Justice [2012] EWHC 2381 (Admin). |
| title_full_unstemmed | Escaping the shackles of law at the end of life: R (Nicklinson) v Ministry of Justice [2012] EWHC 2381 (Admin). |
| title_short | Escaping the shackles of law at the end of life: R (Nicklinson) v Ministry of Justice [2012] EWHC 2381 (Admin). |
| title_sort | escaping the shackles of law at the end of life r nicklinson v ministry of justice 2012 ewhc 2381 admin |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT herringj escapingtheshacklesoflawattheendoflifernicklinsonvministryofjustice2012ewhc2381admin |