London (CNSNews.com) - Lawyers for the British government told Europe's highest court Tuesday that a terminally ill woman has no right to assistance in committing suicide.

Diane Pretty and her husband Brian have brought their case before the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) after their arguments were rejected by the U.K.'s top three courts.

Pretty suffers from motor neurone disease, a degenerative ailment that affects motion and speech. She has been lobbying for her husband to be allowed to help her commit suicide, but the U.K. director of public prosecutions has refused to give way, saying that Brian Pretty could be sent to jail for up to 14 years if he assists in Mrs. Pretty's death.

In the ECHR courtroom in Strasbourg, France Tuesday, lawyers for the British government expressed sympathy for Pretty's plight but reaffirmed the country's legal principals.

"In the United Kingdom a simple and clear-cut distinction has been drawn," said attorney Jonathan Crow. "Domestic law simply does not allow one person to intervene deliberately to bring about another person's death."

Crow pointed out that assisted suicide was illegal in several other European countries and argued that a "right to life" as guaranteed by the European Human Rights Convention did not imply a "right to die."

Pretty's counsel, Philip Havers, said his client was facing a humiliating, undignified death.

"She wishes to avoid such a death," he said. "In English law she would be free to do so if she were physically capable of taking her own life. But this she cannot do because she is so disabled. In order to avoid the suffering indignity and humiliation ... she needs some assistance.

"Her intellect and capacity to make decisions are unimpaired by her disease," Havers continued. "She is neither vulnerable nor in need of protection. Her death is imminent and cannot be avoided."

The hearing was completed Tuesday, and a decision is not expected for at least two weeks. The ECHR acts, in effect, as a supreme court for rights issues and countries are expected to change national laws according to court rulings. There is no right to appeal.

Pretty's condition has been deteriorating in recent months, and the court decided to move up her case after it was appealed from the British House of Lords.

Pretty's case was heard by the ECHR's Grand Chamber, a 17-member judicial panel, and the ruling will be made by majority vote.

Misrepresented evidence

Tamora Langley, a spokeswoman for the Voluntary Euthanasia Society (VES), said the U.K. government misrepresented laws in other European countries when argued in front of the House of Lords that assisted suicide was only legal in the Netherlands.

"In fact, we found that in most European countries, assisted suicide is not a crime," Langley said. "Other countries have special provisions that apply when the patient is terminally ill. The U.K. has the harshest laws in Europe."

She said that Europe's relatively more liberal laws may work in Pretty's favor. The VES, which has backed Pretty throughout her legal battle, advocates a British law that would regulate assisted suicide.

"We know that assisted suicide goes on in this country anyway, and we would like it to be controlled," Langley said.

She said that while the ECHR has the power to consider larger ethical issues than many national courts, she wasn't confident that the court would rule in Pretty's favor.

Anti-euthanasia activists were equally apprehensive about the case's outcome Tuesday. Andy Berry, spokesman for Alert, said he was "really, really scared" that the court was on the edge of a slippery slope.

"I really hope that I don't look back on today and think that this was the day that my right to life began to be eroded," he said.

Berry, who is disabled, said a decision in favor of Pretty would imply that "if you are disabled, you have just one right, the right to die."

"We are all interdependent on everyone else," he said. "A threat to one person is a threat to all. I'm very concerned about the decision."