Emmanuel Macron in search of the most consensual outcome possible

These are very clear conclusions: three quarters of the 184 citizens who are members of this Citizens’ Convention on the end of life are in favor of the establishment of active assistance in dying, assisted suicide or euthanasia.

>> End of life: what should we expect after the conclusions of the citizens’ convention paving the way for assisted suicide and euthanasia?

Still, the head of state is not forced to follow this advice. He will not reveal his personal position today. Emmanuel Macron should praise the quality of this work and indicate that he wants the debate to continue in society. Initiate what the Elysée calls an “act 2”. With the hope of finding the most consensual outcome possible.

But do we know which side leans Emmanuel Macron?

For six years, on this subject, the Head of State has varied a lot. He initially said he was in favor of euthanasia. Emmanuel Macron had sent favorable signals to associations and personalities who campaign for the right to die with dignity. The actress Line Renaud even claimed to have convinced him. And then in recent months, Emmanuel Macron seemed less upbeat, he hesitated and consulted a lot of representatives of religions, all fiercely hostile to a change in the law. And then, before considering it, the executive wants to present, before the summer, an ambitious plan, a “ten-year strategy“, for the development of palliative care and to ensure legal access for patients throughout the territory.

However, it is difficult to imagine a legislative status quo on the end of life. After four months of diligent work, an overwhelming majority of the convention emerged in favor of active assistance in dying. Convention members warn the executive: “It is time for the voice of citizens to be fully heard and taken into account“. And in all the polls, a clear majority of the opinion leans in the same direction.

While Emmanuel Macron is trying to impose his pension reform against a majority of French people, it would still be quite surprising if he also applied himself to refusing any legislative development on the end of life desired by this same majority. Unless you want to practice a kind of therapeutic relentlessness to take opinion the wrong way…