1. INTRODUCTION Ramon Sampedro became a quadriplegic at the age of 25 after a diving accident. He contended for the right to die and a decree that the people who assisted him would be relieved of criminal prosecution with the help of Julia. The Spanish Court however, repudiated his claims on many occasions. On January 12, 1998, he committed suicide by consuming a cup of lethal potassium cyanide and sipped it through a straw. Rosa was a woman who loved him and tried to dissuade him against dying on many occasions but was believed to be led by love to help accomplish his will at the end. A quadriplegic priest, Father Andres, represented the religious voice of the Catholic Church. In this essay, I will expound on ethical issues that surround this case, including euthanasia, autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence and justice. The legal principle that has also come to light in this case is assisted suicide in the Spanish court. I would be exploring the similarities and differences between our local legal proceedings and that of in Spain. 2. EUTHANASIA In the Netherlands, euthanasia is defined as death resulting from medication that is administered by a physician with the direct purpose of expediting death at the request of the patient (Heide et al., 2007). There are different forms of euthanasia, including active, passive, voluntary and involuntary euthanasia. In Ramon's case, he willingly committed suicide with the assistance of some of his friends and hence his case can be considered a form of assisted suicide and active voluntary euthanasia. Several dichotomies encircle his experience, where euthanasia can be regarded as an unethical crime or a gesture of moral kindness (Avila, 2000). 3. AUTONOMY AND THE RIGHT TO DIE WITH DIGNITY Autonomous patients, as defined by Beauchamp and Childress (1994), are decision-makers who choose intentionally with understanding, and whose decisions are not restricted externally. Ramon, in this case, was clamoring for the right to die with dignity which involved having enough drugs in his possession and his struggle was in the cause of autonomy for disabled people (Guerra, 1999). The right to die however is a misnomer, as we would all eventually die (Lapertosa, 2006). The case presents dignity in a dichotomized view. Firstly, to Ramon, he believed that he owned the autonomy to preserve his dignity comprising of values such as physical comfort, freedom from pain and the right to die with dignity (Pullman, 2002). Kant (1987) maintains that it is the human capacity for rationality coupled with an autonomous will that gives humanity its dignity. Those who lack autonomy are thought to lack dignity, and that individuals have the autonomy and obligation to relieve pain and suffering. As such, Ramon, who was still able to maintain his rationality, desires to preserve his dignity by relieving his suffering through exercising his right to die an earlier death. Ramon views autonomy as a prerogative, contributing to his intrinsic dignity that empowers him (Beyleveld & Brownsword, 2001). Julia also mentioned that she wanted to join "death with dignity  ever since she was diagnosed with her disease. It brought continual suffering and damage to her dignity, and therefore she was supportive of euthanasia as well. On the other end, the Catholic Church in Spain believes that God has autonomy over the body and dignity is an inherent moral quality where the capacity to suffer is a consequence of personhood. Hence, the prerogative to take one's life belonged only to God (Lowey, 1990). Therefore Father Andres admonished Ramon, saying that he does not have autonomy ove