Luring the discussion in the Senate of the bill on pensions, some parliamentarians argued that it would have been better to focus first on the problem of old age than on the future of retirement. When the question arises of legislating on assisted dying, the same remark can be made. Admittedly, delaying the retirement age has upset a majority of French people, while a new law intended to replace the current framework on the end of life (Claeys-Leonetti law of 2016) seems to have the assent of a large percentage of our fellow citizens – which might plead in favor of a new legislative act on this second subject. Admittedly, this will have been preceded by a popular consultation in the form of a citizens’ convention which seems to come out in favor of the act of legislating. However, the very principle of this convention and the way in which it was conducted have recently been the subject of criticism published in the press.
The multiplicity of forums on the subject demonstrates its complexity, and the legislative work will have to disentangle the arguments of those who are in favor of legalizing assisted suicide, and possibly euthanasia, from those who oppose it: the arguments of both sides are understandable. But, before this legislative work, there is the very decision, by the highest authorities of the State, to make a bill, and it is here that the question arises: what law? One can indeed wonder if initiating a project or a bill on the end of life does not mask the more general question of altered autonomy due to disability, illness or old age. Worse, isn’t it likely to lead to the delay of legislative reflection on this subject? However, this reflection, for demographic reasons, must be considered as an emergency.
Prince of justice
Although the ambition to better compensate for the loss of autonomy has been affirmed during each of the three previous five-year terms, it has never been seriously implemented, no doubt in part because of the Covid-19 pandemic which has delayed well projects. Shouldn’t such an ambition finally lead to a legislative act necessary for our country, and which would mark the current five-year term? The project is huge, and requires addressing the conditions of the “end of life”, before addressing the means of the “end of life”. An end of life which is humane, that is to say essentially which takes place while respecting the four ethical principles of beneficence, non-abuse, respect for autonomy and above all justice. Incidentally, it will be noted that one of the criticisms of the pension bill is linked to the fact that our fellow citizens were not convinced by the argument that it was compatible with better justice.
You have 51.52% of this article left to read. The following is for subscribers only.
