Despite this they ruled in favor of the United Kingdom, citing States have the right to regulate general criminal laws which are harmful to the life and safety of other individuals.. .the law in question in this The case, section 2 of the 1961 Act, was designed to safeguard life by protecting the weak and vulnerable, including those who cannot make informed decisions against acts intended to end life. However, this division of assisted suicide into what is morally justifiable and what is not is not easy. While Tur argues that it is possible to make a morally justifiable argument in favor of assisted suicide in Dianne Pretty's case, he argues that in McShane's case there was no morally justifiable argument. In this case McShane attempted to assist in his mother's suicide by providing her with pills to end her life. However, McShane did this so that he could possibly benefit financially from his mother's death. While Tur's perspective is interesting, it only refers to case management on an individual basis. Lord Pannick, barrister for Debbie Purdy at the Court of Appeal, said the DPP should consider "... whether there is a realistic prospect of obtaining a conviction and whether prosecution would be in the public interest". It is arguable whether Lord Pannick's claim is comparable to Tur's claim that only certain types of assisted suicide should be prosecuted, for example cases lacking moral justification such as the McShane case. Debbie Purdy's case bears a close resemblance to that of Dianne Pretty. suffering from physical disabilities due to incurable diseases (Multiple Sclerosis). Due to inconsistencies between the law and the prosecution, Debbie Purdy has started a case to clarify whether or not her husband... middle of paper... has deaths on both competent and incompetent cases. Competent individuals can make an autonomous decision, while incompetent patients are required to appeal to the court. Assisted suicide is preferable to voluntary euthanasia because it shows more evidence of a genuine desire to die. However, many people who ask for euthanasia do so because they cannot physically end their lives. It would be discriminatory to deny someone the right to autonomy, dignity and control simply because they cannot physically handle it themselves. In conclusion, UK euthanasia legislation must and will change in the near future. This will result in assisted dying, of some kind, available to those who truly need it. In the meantime, it is of the utmost importance that an agreement is reached within the parameters of this law and its regulations.