ChatterBank1 min ago
Ian Brady (Moors murderer) wants to die, should he be allowed to?
I didnt realise that he is being tube fed since being on hunger strike 12 years ago.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18739237
Im a little surprised they are permitted to feed him by tube, claiming his insanity, im sure they are acting within the law but I really dont know how!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18739237
Im a little surprised they are permitted to feed him by tube, claiming his insanity, im sure they are acting within the law but I really dont know how!
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by RATTER15. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.Because he is in a secure mental hospital, the doctors are not legally allowed to withdraw 'life-saving' services, i.e. feeding him.
If he is in prison, the 'authorities' have no legal powers to force him to take nourishment, hence his determination to be moved to prison where he cab successfully die.
If he is in prison, the 'authorities' have no legal powers to force him to take nourishment, hence his determination to be moved to prison where he cab successfully die.
Because he is in a secure mental hospital, the doctors are not legally allowed to withdraw 'life-saving' services, i.e. feeding him.
If he is in prison, the 'authorities' have no legal powers to force him to take nourishment, hence his determination to be moved to prison where he can successfully carry out his planned death.
If he is in prison, the 'authorities' have no legal powers to force him to take nourishment, hence his determination to be moved to prison where he can successfully carry out his planned death.
sandyRoe, it doesnt come down to having the time to look after him, we all have the right to refuse treatment, to go against this basic human right is against the law.
JTH, Maybe you have it there, it still doesnt sound right to me. Im not talking about Brady, just the principle of denying a person that right of choice. Its difficult to judge without knowing all the facts I know.
JTH, Maybe you have it there, it still doesnt sound right to me. Im not talking about Brady, just the principle of denying a person that right of choice. Its difficult to judge without knowing all the facts I know.
The irony is that at the time Brady and Hindley committed their heinous offences capital punishment was still in force. They were arrested the day after it was suspended (later abolished). Although since the last executions in August 1964 and the suspension of the death penalty in November 1965 all capital convicts were routinely reprieved, had they been caught a year earlier they would have been sentenced to death and even the Labour Home Secretary would have been hard-pressed to justify a reprieve. Myra Hindley would have taken Ruth Ellis's place in criminal history.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.