Pwas it possible, in France, to take decisions on heavy, divisive, even passionate subjects, without getting torn apart, after having listened to the arguments of one and the other? Do we know, in France, how to bring back from the citizens the enlightened opinions which will justify a reform and consolidate it, far from a vertical functioning which weakens democracy?
The publication, Sunday, April 2, of the report resulting from the work of the citizens’ convention on the end of life, the reception of its members, the next day, by Emmanuel Macron, who announced the start of construction of a bill “by the end of summer”, are far from providing definitive answers to these crucial questions.
But the seriousness shown by the 184 citizens drawn by lot, their respect for all sensitivities resulting in a “opinion swatch”their invitation addressed to the government to “find out all the complexity” of the question, tends to show that it is possible to escape the race for lapidary polemics and Manichaean arguments.
After twenty-seven days of debate and around sixty hearings of experts, representatives of religions, philosophers, doctors and caregivers, the “conventional” established an order of priority that the government would be well advised not to forget, whatever the final decisions.
The way to compromise
In the first place, ” to strenghten “ the healthcare system to support end-of-life patients. Then, establish ” a right ” access to palliative care. Finally, the majority of the convention expressed itself in favor of“an openness to active assistance in dying”, an expression that encompasses assisted suicide and euthanasia. Without hiding the minority opinions on this last essential choice, they justified it by the need to respect “everyone’s freedom of choice”by the shortcomings of the 2016 law and by the desire to put an end to “clandestine euthanasia”.
After the disappointing experience of the climate convention, when democracy shows signs of running out of steam and calls for new tools to fulfill the 1789 promise to allow “all citizens to compete personally, or through their representatives” to the formation of the law, the “conventionals” of 2023, by overcoming the cleavage which opposes the militants of the “right to choose one’s death” to those who refuse the idea of killing, have shown the way to a compromise . It was up to Emmanuel Macron to follow her, including in terms of palliative care – an area in which his announcements on Monday remained unclear – even if he was careful not to promise to respect each proposal.
By asking the government to draw up a bill in connection with parliamentarians appointed by the presidents of the two Chambers, the Head of State is implying that the heavy choices that remain to be made will be made independently of his personal convictions, on a broad basis, which can only be that outlined by the convention, except to condemn the“work of democratic reinvention” whom he greeted on Monday. The stakes are high, and the discussion, particularly on the possible role of doctors, is far from over.
It would be disastrous if the question of the end of life, on which a clear majority of French people would like the legislation to evolve, serve as a bias to get out of the political crisis that the country is experiencing. The success of citizen work on a complex subject, combining intimacy and collective responsibility, invites to implement as soon as possible, on other subjects, a new way of exercising power, relying on collective intelligence. , frank information and a sense of nuance born of informed debate.