Laurent Frémont and Emmanuel Hirsch, two founders of the collective Democracy, Ethics, and Solidarity, recently shared their concerns about a proposed law regarding end-of-life care in France. They argue that this law marks a significant ethical shift that disregards the most vulnerable people and the fundamental purpose of medical care.
The law aims to provide legal assistance for dying, but it hides a more troubling reality: it sets up a fast-tracked, unclear process that could be dangerous for those who are most at risk. Instead of protecting patients, it exposes them; instead of offering care, it eliminates lives. The proposal introduces euthanasia and assisted suicide as forms of “care,” which conflicts with the medical goal of preserving life and providing comfort. This change could harm the trust between healthcare providers and patients and disrupt medical ethics in a way that no other country has attempted.
One of the main issues is that the law allows anyone with a severe and incurable illness, who is suffering and deemed to be in “unbearable” pain, to request assisted death. However, the terms used in the law are vague, and there are no clear medical criteria. This lack of precision could lead to serious abuses. Under a strict interpretation, over a million people, including those with chronic illnesses, mental health issues, or the elderly, could qualify for assisted dying. This is alarming.
What’s even more concerning is that it would be easier to get assisted dying than to receive proper medical care. A patient wouldn’t need to submit a written request or go through a thorough evaluation; just a simple oral request to an undefined “doctor” would suffice. A second medical opinion wouldn’t be mandatory, and the process could even happen without consulting family members. The proposed waiting period to receive assisted death is just fifteen days, which raises questions about whether this truly allows for informed and free choice.
The law would create a very coercive atmosphere where healthcare providers would be pressured to facilitate assisted dying within healthcare facilities. The concept of informed consent becomes meaningless in such a serious context. Medical professionals could face legal consequences if they try to dissuade someone from choosing assisted dying, and pharmacists would be required to provide the means for it without the option to refuse. This raises serious concerns about the freedom of conscience for those who are dedicated to life and care.
Assisted dying could take place at home, in hospitals, or nursing homes, without adequate oversight. The only checks would occur after someone’s death, based solely on declarations, with no involvement of family members who might not even know what happened until it’s too late. This creates a scenario in which many people could find out that their loved ones died without a chance to say goodbye, leading to a society filled with loneliness and silence.
Overall, this poorly prepared law threatens to change France’s approach to end-of-life care without meaningful debate about its profound implications. It does not create a new right; instead, it empties the ethical framework surrounding life and death.
This article has been translated and simplified by artificial intelligence from a French article “Proposition de loi « fin de vie » : « elle ne protège pas, elle expose ; elle ne soigne pas, elle élimine »”
It may therefore contain errors. The French version is the reference version..