The Claeys-Leonetti law on the end of life, “is not well known”, estimates the deputy MoDem, who chairs the mission to evaluate this text, while the citizens’ convention must say this weekend whether it should be changed .
“The question of the end of life is no longer an eruptive subject in French society”, said Wednesday March 29 on franceinfo Olivier Falorni, MoDem deputy for Charente-Maritime, president of the Claeys-Leonetti law assessment mission, while the current legislation on the end of life, which does not authorize the euthanasia or assisted suicide, does not respond to all situations, estimated deputies responsible for evaluating the 2016 law, which sets the current legislation on the end of life. A “citizen convention”, made up of French people drawn by lot, must say this weekend whether it is desirable to change the law. This law “is poorly known” and the “palliative culture has not yet fully irrigated the medical world”, believes Olivier Falorni. According to him, “more French people would make their advance directives if the right to be able to request active assistance in dying was offered to them”.
franceinfo: What message do you draw from your assessment of the Claeys-Leonetti law?
Olivier Falorni: We come to a conclusion that leads us to realize that this law is poorly applied. She is poorly known. While it is poorly known to citizens, we can understand it, even if we can regret it. We understand it less on the part of some caregivers. This is the problem of the palliative culture which has not yet completely irrigated the medical world. There is still a tightness between what is called curative care and palliative care. Unfortunately, we are still in the logic of healing before treating. Today, what we are saying is that this law is not applied well enough. There are two points of view that have been expressed. Some tell us, this law is a national treasure, it must be better applied. Others tell us, like Professor Martine Lombard, that this law is not applied because it is not applicable.
Is the ignorance of the law or its lack of application linked to a law that can be improved?
End-of-life laws are a continuum. Since 1999, there have been several end-of-life laws that have each marked progress for patients’ rights. Advance directives, the person of trust, palliative care, these are advances on which we must not go back, but on the contrary, we must progress. Simply, the deep and continuous sedation, today, it is not practiced and it questions a lot. And that’s an important part of the report. We really wonder if this is a solution.
How is it that today in France everyone has already heard of euthanasia and the debate that exists, but does not know that they can make advance directives?
Perhaps more French people would make their advance directives if the right to be able to request, in a situation of end of life, active assistance in dying was offered to them. Let’s stay within the framework of the current law. I believe that today there is a double problem. First, because death remains a taboo. The paradox is that when you talk to people about the end of life, they talk about it spontaneously. And that fascinates the French because it interests them all. But death remains a taboo and it does not come spontaneously. So the fact of making advance directives is not something natural. Some even say it’s bad luck.
Is there a taboo? It is also a real subject for you, deputies, whatever the opinion on the evolution of the law or not…
Effectively. But there is something I want to say in a context where we see what an eruptive social subject really is: pensions. That is an eruptive subject in society, which fractures it. Today, the question of the end of life, I affirm it, is no longer an eruptive subject in French society. Today, society has evolved. And I think she’s matured to move on. This is my point of view and I hope that the citizens’ convention will be heard. We have just gone through several important stages. The national ethics committee, in September, said that there was a possible path for active assistance in dying according to certain rules. Beyond the question of the end of life, this citizens’ convention is intended to respond to the concern that the French today express, ie of not being heard enough. So I hope that the citizens’ convention will be heard by the President of the Republic.