It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
A High Court Judge has ruled that a brain-damaged woman should not be allowed to die, in what is being seen as a landmark case. The woman, who is 52 and can be referred to only as M, is in what is known as a "Minimally Conscious State".
Originally posted by Lulzaroonie
I can only assume the woman is just lying in a hospital bed dreaming her life away, or whatever happens when you are comatose.
I understand the preservation of life is important, but if you are not living your life and it looks likely that you will not be able to continue living in a conscious state, how is this judgement fair?
I would not like to while my years away in a bed, not being able to see my family grow up and not be able to grow old with someone, sentimental perhaps, but things that people would miss out on.
Eight and a half years of being severely brain damaged and vegetative is not living