The wording of Irish law on assisted suicide could be considered ambiguous, writes Dr Muiris Houston.
The case of the disabled man who availed of assisted suicide in Switzerland late last year will evoke a wide range of emotions.
It is also likely to cause a debate here about euthanasia and assisted suicide, two related but distinct practices.
If death occurs as a result of an overt act by a doctor, it is defined as euthanasia.
However, if there is no participation by a doctor, or if she or he provides the means by which a patient's death will occur, it is assisted suicide.
The Criminal Law (Suicide) Act, 1993, provides for the criminalisation of assisted suicide: "A person who aids, abets, counsels or procures the suicide of another, or an attempt by another to commit suicide, shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on conviction on indictment to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 14 years," it states.
However, this wording could be considered ambiguous.
Dr Deirdre Madden, lecturer in medical law at University College Cork, and author of Medicine, Ethics and the Law, says it raises the question of how much assistance must be given to violate the terms of the Act, which has a similar wording to UK legislation.
"In a case in Britain, the defendant was prosecuted for providing the deceased person with paracetamol pills at her request, which she used to commit suicide.
The defendant said that it had been the deceased's wish to have the option of taking her own life.
"But the judge directed the jury to find him not guilty as there was no evidence to support the charge of assisting suicide," Dr Madden said yesterday.
In her view, if a case concerning the legal right to assisted suicide was taken in the Republic, it would hinge on the issue of autonomy and equality.
One of the key issues in any discussion on assisted suicide is that surrounding the competence of a person to make up his mind to end his life, and his ability to communicate that decision to others.
It is particularly relevant in the case of the first Irish person known to have sought assisted suicide in Switzerland.
While the man is known to have been mentally competent despite severe injury, it is unclear whether, before travelling to Switzerland last November, he had confirmed he wanted to die.
Sources have indicated that he did express this view on an ongoing basis, but it has also been established that he had communication difficulties and had accepted life-saving treatment since his accident some years ago.
His state of mind before and during his trip to Switzerland is a key factor in assessing his readiness to avail of assisted suicide.
To be valid in law, such an assessment would need to be carried out by a professional such as a consultant psychiatrist.
Another issue that arises in this man's case is his ability to participate in the final act of ingesting the fatal dose of barbiturate.
What is not clear is whether this was administered by a relative or a Dignitas volunteer; nor has it been established whether the drug was given orally or through a gastrostomy tube (directly into the stomach using a syringe).
Unlike in Britain, where last year a judge stated that the husband of "Mrs Z", a woman with cerebellar ataxia who was planning to travel to Switzerland for assisted suicide, would arguably be committing an offence under Section 2 of the 1961 UK Suicide Act, medico-legal experts here take the view that the man's family have not broken the law.
It appears that the judgment in the X case, which allows for the right to travel for abortion to be carried out, will, by extension, protect any family who make arrangements on behalf of a relative to avail of assisted suicide in Switzerland.
With this case now in the public domain and access to assisted suicide in Switzerland established, it is time for a debate on the many legal, ethical and medical aspects surrounding assisted suicide and euthanasia in the Republic.