Published on 3 May 2025 by pgibertie
After a busy week, on the evening of Friday 2 May, the French National Assembly’s Social Affairs Committee adopted the draft bill on the “ end of life “, now renamed the “ related to the right to die ” bill, for failure to accept the reality of the terms assisted suicide and euthanasia. The final vote endorsed a particularly permissive version of the text, despite numerous warnings about its ethical, legal and human imbalances.
“Obstruction offences”: a worrying semantic shift
Article 17, which introduces an ” offence of obstructing assisted dying “, has crystallised tensions. For Patrick Hetzel, this point touches on “ a fundamental ethical issue “. A number of MPs, notably from the Rassemblement National, questioned the dividing line between attempting to deter suicide and criminally reprehensible obstruction: “ If I save someone from defenestration, are you going to put me in prison?
Philippe Juvin recalled the very role of psychiatry, which is to “ try to prevent ” suicidal acts, and warned against formulating the text too broadly. Associations such as SOS Suicide, mentioned by Thibault Bazin, could see their work criminalised under this approach.
Amendments aimed at creating a symmetrical offence of incitement to “aid in dying” were rejected. Thibault Bazin, Frédéric Valletoux and Cyrille Isaac-Sibille defended this “ fair balance” measure. But the general rapporteur Olivier Falorni opposed it, arguing that the 1974 law on abortion is balanced: it contains an offence of obstruction, but no offence of incitement.
However, even Yannick Monnet said he was in favour of this symmetry, on a personal basis, to avoid certain abuses. To no avail.
The absence of palliative care, an accepted blind spot
At the end of the session, several amendments sought to introduce a link between the effectiveness of palliative care and the application of the law. Christophe Bentz proposed postponing the entry into force of the text until 2030, “ the emergency being palliative care “. Sandrine Dogor-Such (RN) suggested making this conditional on the presence of at least one palliative care unit in each département.
Patrick Hetzel expressed a shared concern that some people should not resort to “aid in dying” for lack of care. Matthias Tavel replied that there was no confrontation between the two approaches. However, all these amendments were rejected.
The evidence is clear: no safeguards explicitly linking access to palliative care and the possibility of medically assisted death have been adopted.
A law with a clear outline
Finally, the very title of the text was changed. Rejecting the terms ” euthanasia ” or ” assisted suicide “, considered too explicit by some, Olivier Falorni proposed the wording ” relative au droit à l’aide à mourir ” (related to the right to assisted dying). This wording was adopted.
A law without checks and balances
This draft law marks a major turning point. Despite intense debate and constant calls for balance, the text adopted by the committee includes no offence of incitement, no conditions for access to palliative care and no reinforced conscience clause. As Christophe Bentz pointed out during the sitting: ” This is the most permissive text in the world “.
Contrary to the ethic of vulnerability, the legislator seems to have given precedence to the logic of a radical individual right – even in death – over the collective guarantees essential to genuine protection of vulnerable people.
