But the advice drew condemnation from anti-euthanasia groups who accused the BMA of issuing doctors with a licence to kill

But the advice drew condemnation from anti-euthanasia groups, who accused the BMA of issuing doctors with a licence to kill.Dr Michael Wilks, chairman of the BMA's ethics committee, said the guidance was needed because of growing confusion among doctors following the case of Tony Bland - a Hillsborough stadium victim - and advances in medical technology which have made it possible to prolong life indefinitely.Dr Wilks said: "This is not about euthanasia. In some cases, where the treatment is expensive, it may be withheld on cost grounds. The association has drawn up the first ethical guidelines on withdrawal of treatment, published yesterday, in response to demands from doctors confused about their ethical and legal duty. No one has an inalienable right to receive all possible treatment to keep them alive and doctors must be clear that the treatment they provide is likely to produce clinical benefit. DOCTORS SHOULD stop giving treatment to patients to whom it is providing no benefit, and should allow them to die, even when the patients request the treatment, the British Medical Association said yesterday. I am anxious about even more powers being given to doctors in the absence of adequate safeguards.". But patients or their relatives do not have a right to demand treatment in the absence of evidence of benefit.A group of lawyers and healthcare professionals called Hope (Healthcare Opposed to Euthanasia) said there was a need to recognise the inevitability of death but warned the guidance would be bad for some patients.Dr Andrew Fergusson, chairman, said: "I am deeply concerned some doctors might interpret the guidelines to increase the number of unnatural deaths. Its guidance, the most comprehensive that has been assembled, covering adults and children and both competent and incompetent patients, says doctors should make every effort to reach agreement with patients and their families and other members of the health care team on what is in the best interests of the patient.The guidance states that patients have a right to refuse treatment which cannot be over-ruled, even where there is clear evidence that it would be of benefit.

The Law Lords, in a landmark decision, agreed that artificial nutrition and hydration counted as a medical treatment and could be withdrawn, allowing him to die.Last year, the association consulted 2,000 doctors on the issue and found widespread confusion about the implications of the case for patients with different conditions but in a similar state. It is about a compassionate decision whether to provide treatment."The guidance builds on the 1993 case of Mr Bland, who was left brain damaged and in a persistent vegetative state following the Hillsborough football stadium disaster. If the answer is maybe not, then the question is what steps should be taken in making a judgement whether to withhold or withdraw treatment That is a long way from intentionally ending life. It is about asking a central question whether treatment is providing benefit. But the advice drew condemnation from anti-euthanasia groups who accused the BMA of issuing doctors with a licence to kill.Dr Michael Wilks, chairman of the BMA's ethics committee, said the guidance was needed because of growing confusion among doctors following the Tony Bland case, the Hillsborough victim who was left brain damaged, and advances in medical technology which have made it possible to prolong life indefinitely "This is not about euthanasia. In some cases, where the treatment is expensive, it may be withheld on cost grounds. The association has drawn up the first ethical guidelines on withdrawal of treatment, published yesterday, in response to demands from doctors confused about their ethical and legal duty. No one has an inalienable right to receive all possible treatment to keep them alive and doctors must be clear that the treatment they provide is likely to produce clinical benefit.

DOCTORS SHOULD stop providing treatment to patients to whom it is providing no benefit and allow them to die, even when the patients request the treatment, the British Medical Association said yesterday. The Cancer Guide, published yesterday, which will be available free athospitals, clinics and branches of Boots, lists questions to be asked at each stage of treatment and includes a directory of organisations.Dr Jane Maher, medical director of the charity, said: "People diagnosed with cancer have no map and no interpreter and are in an alien country.". A survey by the charity found fewer than half of cancer patients were properly involved in decisions about their treatment and care. Cancer was also used as a metaphor for evil and corruption, as in "a cancer at the heart of government"."We all accept cancer is a serious illness but this bombardment of negative images increases suffering," Mr Young said. A survey of 5,000 articles on cancer published in 18 national newspapers over six months found war imagery was the most frequent used to describe cancer, including words such as "battle", "victim" and "weapon". Living with cancer is a reality today."Mr Young was speaking at the launch of a campaign to alter the language of cancer, which he said presented a uniformly negative image of the disease, increasing fear.

It is going to happen in the next edition," Mr Young said.More than one million people are living with cancer in the UK and the figure was projected to rise to two million by 2020, he said "Cancer is not necessarily an immediate death sentence. Nick Young, chief executive of Macmillan Cancer Relief, wrote to the dictionary's editor to protest about the entry on the grounds that it took no account of recent advances in the treatment and understanding of the disease, which had led to longer survival. The OED's editor had disclosed that the entry had been written in 1888 "He said it was about time they changed it. which eats away or corrodes the part in which it is situated and generally ends in death". The existing entry defines cancer as "a malignant growth....

THE OXFORD English Dictionary is to rewrite its entry for the word "cancer" in its next edition after representations from a cancer charity which said the current definition was too gloomy. Touted in Hollywood as the new Cary Grant because he "exudes Brit polish and panache".. The book was turned into a Leonardo Di Caprio film shot by the Trainspotting duo, Andrew McDonald and Danny Boyle.JUDE LAWHip 26-year-old Britpack actor married to fellow Britpack actress Sadie Frost. Engaged to the Radio One presenter Zoe Ball.CATHERINE ZETA JONESWelsh actress who effortlessly graduated from small-screen temptress in Darling Buds of May to big-screen siren in The Mask of Zorro and the current US blockbuster Entrapment.ROBBIE WILLIAMSFormer Take That band member who emerged from "drink'n'drugs hell" to take rock-pop world by storm with a cheeky stage show and critically acclaimed second album, I've Been Expecting You.ALEX GARLANDCult novelist whose debut The Beach became a backpacker's bible. Writing a script starring a gay James Bond.FATBOY SLIMFormer member of the Eighties pop combo, The Housemartins, who now plys his trade asretro-plundering techno-boogie DJ. Films include The Madness of King George and My Best Friend's Wedding. Among those are John Travolta, out of favour for starring in "too many movies", Sharon Stone, who has "lost her flash", and Jerry Springer, whose chat show is said, to have "been tamed".RUPERT EVERETTDandy 40-year-old actor and gay icon lauded for his art of scene stealing.