Citizen B's Headlines: Quadriplegic Granted the Right to Die

An Australian quadriplegic was given permission by the high court to refuse food and water to die.

Christian Rossiter, 49, was left only able to wiggle one finger and one foot after numerous accidents since 1988. He is fed through a stomach tube, and even needs help from staff producing bowel movements. In his nursing home in Brightwater, staff turned him every day to prevent bedsores.

In 2008 he asked the nursing staff to remove his feeding tube and let him die. By Australian law, a patient has the right to refuse life-saving treatment (such as a Do Not Resuscitate order) but no one is permitted to aide a person in committing suicide. The nursing home staff feared they would be held liable for homicide, and appealed to the court.

Rossiter appeared in his own defense and said "I can't even wipe the tears from my eyes." He told the court about how active his life had been prior to the accidents; lying in bed all day, unable to even read a newspaper was unbearable to him.

Chief Justice Wayne Martin pointed out that in this case the patient was in full control of his mental faculties, but since he could not end his life on his own willpower, or pull out his own feeding tube to deny treatment, it was his right to have the staff carry out that wish.

Right to Life groups and even Rossiter's own family opposed the decision. They see Rossiter as taking an out rather than allowin the community to care for him. They believe that the decision sets precendent for more liberal euthanasia laws.

While it is a victory for euthanasia law, it will not make the end easier for Rossiter who will slowly starve to death.

So what's the right answer here? If Rossiter has the right to deny treatment (in this case his feeding tube) resulting in his death, why is it illegal for the staff to give him a lethal dose of morphine?

What won the case for Rossiter was that he was able to clearly communicate his wishes, something that is not often possible in many euthanasia scenarios. In those situations, like Terri Schiavo, it becomes a legal battle as to who should make the decision.

In arguing euthanasia with a friend, he asked how being given a lethal dose of painkiller was any less criminal than the dying to ask to borrow a gun to end their life.