In her editorial, Laurence de Charette addresses the ongoing debate surrounding end-of-life legislation in France, particularly in light of the delays in voting on the proposed law. She states that the current bill fails to garner the necessary consensus or minimum guarantees for those involved in such critical decisions. By avoiding explicit mention of euthanasia, the supporters of the legislation aim to detach it from the negative connotations associated with the term, but this tactic raises concerns about transparency and ethical implications.

Charette highlights the controversial aspects of the proposed law, such as the idea of controlling the administration of lethal measures only after the fact rather than beforehand. This perspective, she argues, neglects essential ethical considerations and would leave vulnerable individuals unprotected. Additionally, she criticizes the insufficient reflection period outlined in the bill, which allows for only 48 hours before a decision is made, contrasting it with the 14-day retraction period provided in consumer law. Such disparities indicate a troubling lack of seriousness regarding the gravity of end-of-life decisions.

With President Macron advocating for a legislative approach rooted in caution and dignity, Charette suggests that the failure to address fundamental moral and practical concerns in the bill indicates a deeper division within French society on this sensitive topic. The absence of strong safeguards against potential exploitation in the domain of assisted dying raises alarm among critics, underscoring the need for more thoughtful and ethical deliberation before moving forward with any legislation on end-of-life care.