Right to Life in UK Law

Society's interest is in upholding the concept that all human life is sacred and that it should be preserved if at all possible. But this merely shifts the problem where the conflict occurs and calls for a very careful examination of whether, and if so the way in which, the individual is exercising that right. In case of doubt, that doubt falls to be resolved in favour of the preservation of life for if the individual is to override the public interest, he must do so in clear terms.

Doctors faced with a refusal of consent have to give very careful and detailed consideration to the patient's capacity to decide at the time when the decision was made. What matters is that the doctors should consider whether at that time he had a capacity which was commensurate with the gravity of the decision which he purported to make. The more serious the decision, the greater the capacity required.

The degree of risk described as 'real and immediate' in Osman, as used in that case, was a very high degree of risk calling for positive action from the authorities to protect life. It was not an appropriate test to invoke in the present context. It was not an appropriate test to invoke in the present context. Such a degree of risk is well above the threshold that will engage Article 2 when the risk is attendant upon some action that an authority is contemplating putting into effect itself.