A SEVERELY disabled grandfather who is seeking the right to die has lost his legal battle to force the Lord Advocate to publish guidance on assisted suicide.

Gordon Ross, who suffers from severe Parkinson’s disease, said he was “bitterly disappointed” by the judgement issued by Lord Doherty which refuses to compel the Lord Advocate to clarify the law on assisted suicide.

Mr Ross, 66 from Glasgow, is concerned anyone who helped him end his life would face prosecution.

Earlier this year, he raised a human rights challenge saying the Lord Advocate, Scotland’s senior prosecutor, should be ordered to produce a policy regarding the matter.

The former TV producer wanted the policy to identify the circumstances that would be taken into account when deciding if someone who had assisted a death would be prosecuted.

Guidance already exists South of the border.

However, the judgement issued at the Court of Session rules that the current state of affairs in Scotland does not breach the European Convention on Human Rights.

Responding to the announcement Mr Ross indicated he wants to continue his fight, taking his case  “to the highest legal authority possible”.

In a statement he said: “I have no wish to end my own life and hope I never do reach that point.  However, this decision will mean that, if someone has a degenerative condition which might lead them to one day lose the ability to take their own life, they may now choose to do so earlier whilst they still have the capacity rather than put a friend or family member at risk of prosecution by waiting until they might require assistance.

“Far from reducing the tragic number of instances of suicide amongst those with terminal conditions, estimated at around one per week in Scotland, this decision could drive people in my position to end their own lives at the very time when they need all the support they can get to help them manage and cope with their condition.”

As a result of a number of medical problems Mr Ross has lost sensation in his arms and legs. He lives in a care home and is unable to feed or dress himself. He could not attend the court hearings into his case due to the severe episodes of shaking which he has to endure when his body jerks so uncontrollably he fears he will hurt himself or damage things around him.

Mr Ross has argued from the beginning that just because he is physically unable to take his own life doesn't mean he should not have the right to die.

In his statement he said: “I am bitterly disappointed by the decision today by Lord Doherty not to take the opportunity to clarify the current law on assisted suicide in Scotland, described recently by 21 legal academics as ‘shameful’”.  By taking this decision, the Court has lessened the protections that those with disabilities enjoy in our society and made us more vulnerable.”

He thanked his family and friends for their steadfast support while the case was heard and added: "I will be consulting with all of them over the next few days but my current intention is to take this fight to the highest legal authority I can in order to protect my own rights, the rights of those currently in similar circumstances, as well as any amongst us who might find themselves in such a position in the future.”

During the court case Crown lawyers told judge Lord Doherty that if somebody helped another take their own life, it would be reported to the procurator fiscal as a deliberate killing.

It would then be dealt with under the law of homicide. However, prosecution briefs would consider whether there was a direct link between the actions of an accused person and the death before deciding to take the matter to court.

They would also think about whether a prosecution was in the public interest.

In his judgement Lord Doherty wrote: "I see no evidence of arbitrary or inconsistent behaviour on the part of the respondent. The thrust of his policy is to enforce the law.

"The policy is consonant with the rule of law. The public know what his policy is and there is no suggestion that that it is being applied inconsistently. Adopting the language of Lord Judge LJ decisions whether to prosecute will not be based upon the respondent's ungoverned whim but will represent conscientious decisions made by him with reference to his policy.

"In the result I am satisfied that the respondent's policy in relation to prosecution for homicide where the circumstances involve assisted suicide does not lack the requisite accessibility or foreseeability. Nor is it arbitrary."

Proceedings in the case were heard at the Court of Session in Edinburgh in  May this year.