Citizen convention on end of life: doubts beyond votes

Among the 183 conventional, many regret having had to decide on the main lines of the debate on February 19, while their final rendering was only expected on March 19.

By Béatrice Jérôme

Nine days: The time left to the citizen convention on the end of life to decline all the nuances in the opinion it will return to government on March 19. The document is intended to become the cornerstone of a reform of the support of death in France. Since there will be “probably” a law, announced Olivier Véran, Thursday, February 23.

“There is obviously a spirit of openness,” noted the government spokesperson in view of the vote on Sunday, February 19, of the Assembly of the 183 citizens who spoke at 75 % for the opening to the legal possibility of “active help to die”. Clearly, for the legalization of assisted suicide and euthanasia. However, behind a clear “opening” at first glance hide many doubts.

Approaching the three three-day weekends which they will devote to the drafting of their final report, from March 3, the conventionals are far from having decided their dilemmas on the conditions under which the legal framework for the end of life should evolve. Some even say “more fluctuating than ever”.

They heard 60 experts, will eventually debate twenty-seven days for nine weekends, spent at the Economic, Social and Environmental Council (EESC), responsible for organizing the Convention. A WhatsApp loop continues to bring together a good hundred of them. Some hold a logbook. All evoke a “unique”, “magic” experience which will have led them to “get involved”, to “listen to” without inverting. But they have, they say, to untie “the knots”.

“an assumed bias”

Out of 167 voters on February 19, 72 % spoke for the opening to access to assisted suicide and 66 % for euthanasia. “Even if it is dishonest to ask us to decide on the limits of the 2016 Claeys-Leonetti law since it is not fully applied, observes Dominique F., a conventional, this is not a reason for Do not recognize that it does not respond to all end -of -life situations. “A majority position that does not prevent minority from expressing themselves. “I do not deny that there are cases of refractory suffering [that no treatment makes it possible to relieve], says Soline C. I know that medicine can not everything. But the opening to the active help to die is unmanageable, says this conventional, because we will never have the guarantees of the enlightened character of the decision of the person who requests it. ”

If they refuse to be openly critical “for fear of harming the legitimacy of the work undertaken”, several conventional people regret not having been able to “deepen, more abundantly detailing the proposals of the Convention before voting”, the February 19, on the eleven questions which concerned “the active help to die”. Some go so far as to question the possibility of having organized these votes as soon as the work of the “safeguards” convention of the implementation of euthanasia or assisted suicide are not completed or validated by “citizens”.

You have 63.62% of this article to read. The rest is reserved for subscribers.

/Media reports cited above.