In the news late last year was a court battle between two parents, who's son was seriously ill - the mother was arguing for life support to be turned off, the father was insisting that his son had a good enough life to live. (more information below) In the end, the father withdrew his legal plea, and the child was allowed to die.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2009/nov/02/parents-court-clash-over-child

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2009/nov/10/baby-rb-father-withdraws-legal-plea

This could be useful when considering ethics, such as Aquinas' natural moral law, and kants categorical imperative. Which course of action would they consider the 'right' one?

This could also be a useful example to use - at what point does suffering outweigh the importance of human life?