Assisted suicide: analysis and ethical discussion

1: Give an account of the issue as it is presented in text 1 and 2:

The issue in text one Tony Nicklinson, is talking about how a doctor who would try to help him kill himself should not be charged with criminal charges, like assisted murder. Mr. Nicklinson is trying to convince three High Court Judges, that any doctor who is willing to help him, should not be viewed as a criminal. Truly what Mr. Nicklinson is asking for is to extend the common law of "necessity" to assisted suicide and murder, so he can be medically helped to die without the doctor facing a law suit or any criminal charges. Mr. Nicklinson who had, had a catastrophic stroke as written in text 1, that left him paralyzed and only able to open and close his eyelids since 2005. Mr. Nicklinson thinks it is "utter rubbish" that a person is not able to decide when, where and how to end his own life, he believes that it is a humans right to be able to determine that. In the second text Mr. Nicklinson tackles the question "Do any of us, however ill, have the right to die?". He said "What kind of person puts cancer at the top of their wish list?". His problem is that he did not wish for this to happen, and he could not do anything about it. He also said "Am I grateful that the Athens doctors saved my life? No, I am not." all he is doing here is basically ranting about the situation he is in, he does not think it is fair, he believes that the idea of helping him kill himself is mercy, and not murder. You can say that he wants to change the law of assisted suicide, he says that if saving a life isn't working for the patient, he should be able to ask the doctors to kill him.