Interior Minister Bruno Retailleau denounced this Saturday, May 10, the text in the aid on Saturday, May 10, which will be debated since Monday at the National Assembly, while the singer Line Renaud and former Prime Minister Gabriel Attal co-firmar a tribute to the accused.
This text is “deeply unbalanced” and “exploits all locks. It is not a appeasement text, it is an anthropological rupture text,” Du Dimanche Bruno Bruno Retilleau told the Journal Bruno Bruno Retilleau on the bill presented by Olivier Falorni (related Modem).
“If you vote as it is, it would be easier to ask for death than to be treated,” denounces Minister LR, speaking of a text that “is that of renunciation, abandonment.”
“I will fight, because our company needs palliative care, not a legalization of euthanasia,” says Bruno Retilleau.
“Some may want to stop suffering
“If nobody wants to die, on the other hand, some may want to stop suffering,” he argues for his Renaud lateral line, who is 96 years old, and Gabriel Attal, 36, in the columns of the Tribune on Sunday.
For them, “oppose conservatism to any evolution of the law is to approve dogmatism before the suffering of patients. He lacks their duty to listen and humanity impose their morality.”
Line Renaud and Gabriel Attal, who preside over the Macronista group together for the Republic in the National Assembly, therefore, require the action “to offer patients freedom of choice.”
At the end of April, the deputies approved the bill in the Social Affairs Committee to allow patients with a “serious and incurable affection” who “commits the vital prognosis, in an advanced or terminal phase” and that no longer support their suffering, receive or manage a lethal substance.
The Minister of Health, Catherine Vautrin, estimated last month that the opening of the aid to die is “essential for those whose suffering (…) cannot be relieved”, ensuring that this is not opened “an anthropological breakup” due to the multiple established conditions.
In an opinion, the high authority for health has judged “impossible”, for lack of medical consensus, to determine who could benefit from the help to die based on a vital prognosis committed “in the medium term” or in a “terminal phase” of the disease, but suggests taking into account “the quality of the rest” of the person.
The text at the end of life was divided into two proposals of laws, one in help to die and the other, much more agreed, in palliative care.
Source: BFM TV
