In Great Britain, a patient named Tony Nicklinson was paralyzed from the neck down and unable to ...

He communicated by
blinking and it seemed clear to all who treated him that he was mentally competent. Due
to his paralyzed condition, active euthanasia by a doctor (not assisted suicide) would be
necessary to terminate his life. A British court denied this request for a doctor to take his
life, even though a year before his stroke Niklinson had drawn up legal papers to refuse
extraordinary life-saving medical treatment. He then caught pneumonia and refused to
eat, dying just one week after the court refused his request. Because Nicklinson had
signed legal documents before his stroke and when there was no doubt about his mental
competence, should the court have granted his request for euthanasia? Is euthanasia
distinguishable from assisted suicide in such a situation? If assisted suicide would have
been justifiable, should euthanasia also be justifiable when a patient is paralyzed in the
manner of Niklinson?