“Our role is not to provoke death”

What does the amendment inspire to offer French patients the possibility of delegating the lethal gesture to caregivers?

He worries me deeply. He places caregivers in a delicate position, asking them to carry out an act which is not a care. Our role is to relieve until the end, not to precipitate or to cause death. I am in favor of what we do not artificially maintain life. If a person decides that they do not want to go to the end, I respect this choice, but that is no longer the therapist. And even when the caregivers’ consciousness clause is respected, the devices allowing euthanasia weaken the doctor’s position. This is what I observe in the Netherlands.

And when the patient is not able to express his intention?

Our priority is to relieve the pain, then to assess every day if it remains an intention to live. Some patients, despite suffering, still show a quality of life: a look, a tight hand. Based only on early guidelines invoked by relatives is risking an error of judgment – or worse, a decision influenced by material considerations. When a family says: “She would never have wanted to experience this”, it allows you to guess a personality. But that cannot be enough.

In what collective framework should the discernment be made?

At the end of life, cognitive disorders or depressive states can blur the expression of deep desire. The decision cannot be based solely on a document, nor on a loved one or a practitioner alone. Discernment requires in -depth collective dialogue, shared ethics.