Right-to-die ruling stirs passions

LONDON, England -- An historic court decision to allow a British woman the right to die has prompted passionate reactions from those on both sides of the euthanasia debate.

The woman, known only as Miss B, took her case to the High Court in London after doctors refused on ethical grounds to switch off her life support.

The court ruled on Friday that she had been unlawfully kept alive against her wishes.

She had been paralysed for over a year from the neck down after a blood vessel ruptured in her neck. She is unable to breathe unaided.

The British Medical Association welcomed the move, with ethics committee chairman Michael Wilks telling Reuters: "Every competent adult has the right to refuse medical treatment, even when this may lead to their death."

MORE STORIES • Paralysed woman wins right to die  • Judge praises 'courageous' woman     QUICKVOTE Do you agree with the decision by Britain's high court to allow Miss B the right to die? Yes No View Results

However, he said there was always the possibility technological advances could help alter paralysis, referring specifically to former Superman actor Christopher Reeve who has been paralysed since a riding accident several years ago.

Civil rights group Liberty spokesperson Shami Chakrabarti told the Press Association: "We very much welcome the decision which reinforces the principle that adults of sound mind are able to take decisions for themselves, including the decision to die."

Voluntary Euthanasia Society director Deborah Annetts called the ruling "a victory for common sense," while anti-euthanasia campaigners criticised the ruling and warned of dire consequences.

But Andy Berry of anti-euthanasia group Alert told PA: "I am surprised and appalled that the health authority are not going to appeal this decision.

"I'm very concerned about the implications for all disabled people.

"I'm sure Miss B could enjoy life with appropriate support and I'm very sorry she has chosen to refuse rehabilitation."

High Court judge Dame Elizabeth Butler-Sloss said on Friday that Miss B had had the necessary mental capacity since August last year to give or refuse consent to life-sustaining medical treatment.

"Administration of ventilation by artificial means against the claimant's wishes since August 8, 2001, has been an unlawful trespass," she said.

Miss B, in a statement given through her lawyers after the ruling, said: "This is a balanced and well-thought-out judgment and I am very pleased with the outcome of this case.

"The law on consent to treatment is very clear and this has been a long and unnecessary and personally painful process."

Her solicitor, Frances Swaine, added: "It's entirely up to her as to what choice she makes next. She's been given authority to make the decision that she wants."

In previous cases, courts have been asked by doctors to permit the turning-off of life support of people who are in a permanent vegetative state. This is the first time someone with full mental faculties has sought permission.