Firstly, it is necessary to discuss some of the relevant and significant points of the case. Sue Rodriguez is a mother in her forties, suffering from Lou Gehrig's disease. Her life expectancy is several months, however her condition is deteriorating quickly. Soon, she will no longer be able to swallow, speak, walk or move, and she will require a respirator in order to breath. She will be bedridden. Sue Rodriguez is aware of her situation and knows that death is inevitable, however, she wishes to control her circumstances, and her time and manner of death. By the time Sue is no longer able to enjoy life, she will be physically unabl

When examining the Sue Rodriguez case and comparing it with the theories of Patrick Nowell -Smith it is apparent that Nowell-Smith argues for the legalization of euthanasia, thus Sue Rodriguez would agree with his views. It is also obvious that Nowell-Smith would disagree with the decisions of Judge Sopinka. Although Judge Sopinka showed empathy for Sue's condition he strictly emphasized abiding the laws of euthanasia. In contrast, Nowell-Smith stressed the need for a vast change in both the laws and the moral understanding of euthanasia.

There are several reasons why Nowell-Smith would not agree with the judgement in the case. First and foremost, it is clear that Nowell-Smith agrees with euthanasia in most legitimate cases, and it is evident that the judge disagrees. Judge Sopinka focuses on the basic law principals of euthanasia and the fact that they must be followed. He believes that the preservation of human life is a basic value of society. His views are also influenced by the "slippery slope" concept. This concept entails that if assisted suicide was legalized there is a risk that others will manipulate those persons with life threatening disabilities. Also that the decriminalization of this procedure might be altered from its original purpose and abused, in that it would be used to eliminate many who are a burden to others and society. Judge Sopinka holds strong on the protection of life idea; that life must be preserved at all costs. Nowell- Smith, opposes these views, as he argues in support of the legalization of euthanasia, and he states the significance of avoidance of suffering and moral autonomy principles. Nowell-Smith believes that what is often morally right is legally incorrect. He proves his statement when he refers it to the case of Mrs. Hough, who's friend requested that she assist her in her suicide. She did so, and was consequently faced with nine months in prison, on a charge of second degree murder. Although the judge had sympathy for Mrs. Hough, he had to up hold the law. The judge obviously holds similar views to that of Judge Sopinka. Nowell-Smith brings into focus the fundamental principal of medical ethic. This has always been that the doctor should act in the best interest of his patients. Therefore, it is logical to say that if one is in proper mental condition to make a decision regarding their life, and the decision

Some common words found in the essay are:
Rights Freedoms, Patrick Nowell-Smith, Sue Rodriguez, Judge Sopinka, Sopinka Nowell-Smith, Nowell- Smith, Criminal Code, Rodriguez Nowell-Smith, Lou Gehrig's, British Columbia, sue rodriguez, judge sopinka, theories patrick, patrick nowell-smith, liberty security, theories patrick nowell, nowell-smith believes, own life, rights life, able control, equal rights, charter rights freedoms, life liberty security, equal rights life, patrick nowell -smith,
Approximate Word count = 1609
Approximate Pages = 6 (250 words per page double spaced)