“If my wife or I are in this situation, of course, for us, this is the decision we would make.” The political editorialist Alain Duhamel declared in BFMTV on Monday, May 12 that he could have resorted to help die if he was in a situation in which it seemed necessary, while the National Assembly examines a bill at the end of life.
“This is an individual decision, it is not about propaganda,” he said, adding that he would go if necessary in Switzerland, where assisted suicide is legal.
“There is great inequality in this case. People who have the media are a very small minority,” he added, regretting that access to suicide assisted in Switzerland is deeply unequal, because it is very expensive.
“The freedom to choose the moment of his death when one has a terrible suffering, I think that is really part of the freedoms,” he said, saying that he would take legislation in France, which allows those who need to have access to him in the final appeal.
A choice motivated by a personal drama
“My brother died in terrible suffering,” says Alain Duhamel. “I saw one of my brothers, a medical professor, two days before his death, who suffered as a damn.”
The latter, hospitalized in a clinic, did not receive the analgesics he needed, according to the testimony of the political editorialist. “We gave him, before me, Doliprane,” recalls the last one.
“You give exactly the example of a place where the law is badly applied,” said Marie de Hennezel, clinical psychologist, on the set with him.
The psychologist, in opposition to the legalization of euthanasia, believes that Leonetti’s law sometimes does not apply well, but recalls that “it makes the doctor relieve, not abandon his patient.”
However, palliative care is not accessible to all people who need it. “There are half of the French who have no access to him,” said Alain Duhamel.
Source: BFM TV
