One of the unexpected consequences of the dissolution of the French National Assembly in the wake of the European elections is the postponement of the bill to introduce euthanasia in France—without any deadline for its further parliamentary consideration.
During the spring, the first stages of the legislative process unfolded, outlining an extremely progressive law. The law opens up the possibility not only of ‘aid in dying’ but also of formal euthanasia—originally intended as an exception but likely to be widely applied. The bill was due to be examined by MPs until June 18th. It has therefore been suspended, as the MPs will not return to the Assembly until after the second round of legislative elections on July 8th.
Discussions between MPs had already led to significant changes to the initial draft. Some of the provisions most criticised in committee had already been removed, such as the possibility of a third party administering the lethal substance—a situation not currently implemented in any country that uses euthanasia or assisted suicide. The suspension of debates as a result of the dissolution renders null and void all discussions that have already taken place. If the text were to return to the newly elected assembly, the deputies would have to consider the entire initial text, regardless of the work already carried out.
Supporters of euthanasia make no secret of their disappointment at seeing their efforts reduced to nothing. “All those weeks of hearings and debates in the Assembly have been reduced to nothing! It’s absolutely violent,” laments Jean-Luc Roméro, honorary president of the Association pour le droit de mourir dans la dignité (ADMD), France’s main pro-euthanasia lobby. Olivier Falorni, the bill’s general rapporteur, acknowledged that “the abrupt halting of what was going to be the major social legislation of this decade is a great disappointment.”
The general consensus is that the chances of the bill being resubmitted to MPs for consideration are slim. The Rassemblement National, which is currently in the lead in the forthcoming vote, is generally hostile to the bill. And if the President’s camp still managed to retain a majority, euthanasia would clearly not be one of the priorities to be dealt with by the new assembly.
Opponents of the law are delighted at this providential halt to a law deemed dangerous and deadly. “I feel a kind of relief,” explains Claire Fourcade, vice-president of the Société française d’accompagnement et de soins palliatifs, a long-standing opponent of euthanasia. She intends to make the most of the long months that will probably pass before the subject returns to the table to continue to inform people about the dangers of such a law and the need to promote life by strengthening palliative care. A view shared by Patrick Hetzel, a member of the Les Républicains party who is hostile to the bill: “Palliative care and the issue of dependency seem to me to take priority over aid in dying,” he told France info.
Unfortunately, it is to be feared that this uncertain waiting period will be exploited by militant pro-euthanasia associations to make their voices heard in the public debate and strengthen their positions.
