Abortion and Euthanasia

Pro life argument to the law usually focus on the concept that life begins on the moment of conception, that the foetus has a right of life and that right is greater than a women's right of her own body. Restrictions under the Offence Against the Person Act 1861 s58 and s59 gave the case of R v Dingra the courts decision, the doctor was charged under s58 .

The law faces difficulty when it comes to the father's rights on abortion. It is generally seen that fathers have a back step when it comes to pregnancy n and abortions as a feminist approach would be that 'neither the foetus or the putative father has any status to challenge a woman's decision to have a lawful abortion' The case of Paton v TBPA (1978)held that a court would not grant an injunction to a husband to prevent his wife from having an abortion. It is held to be that a woman has greater rights than the foetus in the eyes of he law as it was also held that the foetus does not have an independent legal existence from it mother. This is more of a pro choice perspective as they believe that a woman's right to bodily autonomy takes precedence over the rights of the foetus. Also an opinion that current legislation is opposed on the basis that it imposes significant and unjustified restrictions on that right.

Before the 1967 Act came abortions where illegal and usually performed in back alley abortion clinics, where there was more risk of the procedure going wrong and could end in the death of the mother. In R v Bourne (1938) a 14 year old girl became pregnant after being raped. The doctor performed an abortion with the consent of her parents. The Defendant was charged under S58 of the Offence Against the Person Act 1861. The court held that the burden of proof was on he prosecution to prove that the defendant had not carried out the abortion in good faith to preserve the life of the mother. The jury acquitted the defendant. The law and abortion after rape, the rape itself in a criminal offence but there is no law that states that an abortion must be carried out after it is the choice of the mother.

S1 (e) of the Abortion Act stats that an abortion can be carried out if.. There is a substantial risk that if the child were born it would suffer from physical or mental abnormalities s to be seriously handicapped or in emergencies certified by the practitioner as immediately necessary. The rings forth arguments to the law from pro life activists. Is it right that just because a foetus has a chance of physical or mental illness that a woman has a right to terminate it? Would a person who became handicapped later in life want to die? These to opinions are compared in views as ho should have the right to say who can live and die. The law faces difficulties in these section as although pro choice opinion would agree that a woman need to be able to live there life as well and to think about the woman mental and physical health if she was to carry on with the pregnancy would she be able to cope with an child with mental or physical problems.

This also links with subject of euthanasia should a person who suffers a terminal illness have the right to choose to die? The idea of euthanasia as provoked a debate on whether it should be allowed by law. Those who appose euthanasia appose on a religious Christian principle of the sanctity of life that it is wrong to take a human life. Those who agree with euthanasia base there opinions on the fact that a person should have the right to decide when they die and how they die. For example a Cancer patient who refuses treatment even though without the treatment there is a higher risk of ding has the choice. Euthanasia in UK Law is illegal. There has been many attempts to pass legislation in the UK. N 1938 a Euthanasia bill came into light but had no success. In January 2004 the Assisted Dying for the Terminally Ill Bill was introduced by the House of Lords. It included legislations of euthanasia in the Netherlands ( in where it is legal) and how it operated. This Bill would have allowed a competent adult with a terminal illness who was suffering unbearable to receive assistance to die. In R v Cox (1992) Dr Cox was convicted of attempted murder after injecting potassium chloride into an old lady who was in great pain and wished to die. The court held that it was immaterial whether the doctor motive was to help the patient as he is guilty of an offence if he injected her in a primary purpose of killing her. In the case of R v Adams (1957) the doctor was not charges as he argued that he had given the patient the dose to relive pain and that shortening the patients life was merely incidental to this purpose.

In UK law a person in a vegetative state does not have the right to end there life where in the Netherlands it is law as in 1984 the Royal Dutch Medical Association set out certain guidelines before euthanasia was carried out: must b voluntary request form patient, patients must be intolerable suffering, euthanasia must b a last resort and must b performed by a doctor. Also in 2001 Dutch Parliament passed legislation giving doctors immunity from prosecution for mercy killing and assisted suicide, under conditions.

The difficulty in the UK is that there is not legislation. In the case of Airedale NHS Trust v Bland (1993) when people bring a patients life to an en because they believe it to be the kindest thing to do their actions are considered y the law to be homicide (doctor switched of ventilator). Difficulties in law would be what is the difference with active euthanasia and the 'do not resuscitate' order. A patient decided whether in the chance that if there heart or lungs stop working then not to resuscitate them. Also what's the difference between a person wishing to die and a person refusing a blood transfusion on religious beliefs, as some opinions would be that people should not have the right to refuse, that in itself is a wish to die passive euthanasia. There are three main views to euthanasia 1, the pro life view: all life is uniquely created and deserves absolute respect, 2, pro choice view; the right to self determination is the most, 3, the quality of life argument, for many individuals the quality of life is important, not the sanctity of life or its length.

The law will always have difficulties in the granting of rights as peoples opinions and perspective differ through many different reasons. A main reason for these differences is religion and ethics, what may be right to some people may be wrong to an other. The laws pragmatic approach to subjects lay on the boundaries of both sides.

Bibliography

Beyond Control Medical Power and Abortion Law, Sally Sheldon Pluto Press 1997

Death ,Dying and the Law, Sheila A.M. McLean

Euthanasia The Moral Issue, Robert M.Baird and Stuart E.Rosenbaum Prometheus Books 1989

Feminist Perspectives on Health Care Law, Sally Sheldon and Michael Thomas, Cavendish Publishing 1998

Health Care Law, Jonathan Montgomery, Oxford press 1997

Understanding Medical Law, Brendan Greene, Cavendish Publishing 2005

Cases

Airedale NHS Trust v Bland (1993)Ac 789 HL

Paton v BPAS (1979) 1 QB 276

Paton v Trustees of British Pregnancy Advisory Service (1978) 2 All ER

R v Adams (1957) Crim LR 773

R v Bourne (1938) 3 All ER 615: (1939) 1 KB 687

R v Cox (1992) 12v BMLR 38Paton v BPAS (1979) 1 QB 276#

R v Dingra 1991 Daily Telegraph 25th Jan

http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn11222

Statute

The Abortion Act 1967

Offence Against the Persons Act 1861