How easy it can sometimes be nowadays, to listen to a locked-in patient’s silent answers to questions! (If the doctor can be bothered, that is, because he cares what his patient thinks and is feeling.)
Dying for a drink isn’t a pleasant way for anyone to be forced to spend Christmas, but it is the fate chosen by his British NHS doctors, his wife, and the British judiciary, for one unfortunate Polish fellow, despite the objections of the Polish government and his Polish mother and two sisters. This patient has been prescribed death by thirst. The slow taking of his life began yesterday, a Christmas present for him which he might well have said was unwanted, if only he had been asked.
To describe dying of thirst – not a nice way to go by all accounts (even when it’s not Christmas) – as “euthanasia”, is something of a euphemism. But it appears to be the best treatment the British NHS can offer this unfortunate patient, or so they told the courts. I am suspicious that the NHS didn’t try all that hard to discover the patient’s own preferences as to how and when he’d like to die. As you will learn, if you continue reading, there was quite a lot the NHS could have tried, if they’d wanted to find out what the patient thought and how he felt about his situation.
“Mummy-eee … it said on the news that Boris Johnson had acted unlawfully. Does that mean he’s a crook and will have to go to prison?”
“I don’t know, darling. Mr Corbyn and his party will have to decide that. Let’s wait and see what they say.”
^ click to watch Lady Hale reading the official summary of the judgment ^
Read the official summary of the judgment yourself
Read the official judgment in PDF or HTML format
- Has Boris been “found guilty”, of “breaking the law”?
- Is Boris now officially a “criminal”?
- Should Boris be impeached? Continue reading
It is possible to take the police to court.
A police officer slagged me off in writing in 2014. I sued the chief constable for libel in 2015. It has taken a while, but I have finally won a retraction of the false accusations made against me, plus some money, plus my legal costs. Suing the police involved a lot of waiting, but not a huge amount of work. Continue reading
The late Scott Douglas Routley had a nasty road traffic accident around the turn of the century, which damaged his brain. By 2012, Scott had been comatose, persistently vegetative, “locked-in” – or however you want to put it – for 12 years. He couldn’t move, or talk. Continue reading
This post is sometimes pinned to the top of the blog.
The grievance of guest blogger Gagged Dad, the author of
Two year-old’s contact stopped with homophobic dad
is mentioned in all of these posts.
After a court case in the UK that lasted more than four years, Gagged Dad’s grievance became expressed as an application to the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). The important pages of that ECtHR application, outlining the facts and putting the legal arguments, are here.
It looks as though I am not going to be able to escape from my duty, which seems now to be to bring another court case before long, this time against the Coroner of Liverpool.
Should a bloke be allowed to know if his “girlfriend” (or “bride”) is also a bloke?
“O, what a tangled web we weave when first we practise to deceive!”
Transgenderism is gender fraud. Fraud always has victims.
This post links to a 2005 court case you probably haven’t read about yet.
The UK trying to leaving the EU may turn out to be like Captain Yossarian trying to leave the air force, in Catch-22. I have written a song about this.
Here are the lyrics.
MY 2015 ONLINE ELECTION ADDRESS
North Cornwall Constituency Parliamentary Election, 7th May 2015
Men make lousy mums …
… but, then again, women make lousy dads.
The 1959 Declaration on the Rights of the Child, Principle 6, declared:
“The child, for the full and harmonious development of his personality, needs love and understanding. He shall, wherever possible, grow up in the care and under the responsibility of his parents, and, in any case, in an atmosphere of affection and of moral and material security; a child of tender years shall not, save in exceptional circumstances, be separated from his mother.”
Both parents. Every child. Wherever possible.
Trigger warning: This post is about a piece of British legislation called The Sexual Offences Act 2003. It is absolutely not the rant of a “rape apologist”. If you might find this post triggering, please read it only on understanding that you read it at your own risk.