in the Senate, one week to decide an ethical question

One week…and that’s it. This is the length of time that the elected representatives of the Upper House will have to study two legislative proposals: that aimed at guaranteeing access to palliative care for all patients, and that relating to the creation of a right to assistance in dying. The government has in fact included the examination of these texts on the senators’ agenda from January 20, with a solemn vote scheduled for Wednesday January 28.

“We would have liked parliamentarians to be able to get to the bottom of things,” says Dr Ségolène Perruchio, president of the French Society of Palliative Care (Sfap). And that starts with having the time to do it.” For comparison, the deputies had two weeks last May to express themselves at first reading on these texts.

A reluctant senatorial majority

Unsurprisingly, the very activist Association for the Right to Die with Dignity (ADMD) is delighted that the bill is “finally” on the Senate’s agenda. “We will no longer be able to tolerate another postponement,” assures its president Jonathan Denis.

“We will complete the legislative work on the question of the end of life,” declared, as if in echo, Emmanuel Macron on December 31, during his wishes to the French. If the text on palliative care, adopted unanimously by the National Assembly in May, should be the subject of consensus, the other should generate much more debate. The ADMD is already worried about this, and has set up online forms to “question” its senator, faced with the risk of “unraveling” the text.

The right-wing senatorial majority does not hide its reluctance regarding the legalization of euthanasia and assisted suicide. Because if these two words are absent from the bill, that is what it is about. According to the version adopted by the deputies, the text thus provides for the creation of the “right to assistance in dying (which) consists of authorizing and accompanying a person who has expressed the request, to use a lethal substance (…) so that they administer it to themselves or, when they are not physically able to do so, have it administered by a doctor or nurse.”

Conscience clause

A series of conditions are provided for, in particular the need to be of age and suffering from a “serious and incurable condition, whatever the cause, which is life-threatening, in an advanced phase” and causing “constant physical or psychological suffering”. The request must be formulated in a “free and informed manner”. Furthermore, caregivers will benefit from a conscience clause so as not to be forced to participate in such an act.

An “offense of obstruction” is nevertheless provided for. It will notably sanction “moral or psychological pressure (…) against people seeking information about assisted dying”, or targeting staff participating in it. It is now up to senators to achieve acceptable balances despite the limited time. And they will not be able to count on a possible bog down in the parliamentary procedure: the government has already indicated that it intends to submit these texts for second reading to deputies from the beginning of February.