Several thousand caregivers, doctors, nurses and pharmacists, signed an appeal at the beginning of this month that we launched not to intentionally cause the death of their patients.
The proposed law relating to the end of life has been examined in Parliament since June 22 and deputies will have to vote for or against on June 30. Guardrails are presented to us, but the example of Belgium and the Netherlands clearly shows that these barriers described as insurmountable are quickly overturned, with constantly expanded indications.
The reasons given for requesting euthanasia – guilt of being a burden on those around them, fear of presenting an intolerable image of oneself, a life that seems pointless, fear of unbearable suffering, fear of “therapeutic relentlessness” – must always be heard and supported without ever proposing death as the only desirable outcome.
Meaning the value of life
Studies have shown that among people admitted to palliative care who had expressed, upon entry, a request to end it, only 0.3% had maintained their request once appropriate care had been provided to them: removal of pain (nearly 95% of pain is currently accessible to medical treatment, thanks to advances in science), obtaining comfort, listening and caring support from caregivers showing them the value of their life, however tenuous.
No, palliative care is not the first step in euthanasia! Palliative care and euthanasia are incompatible and irreconcilable!
How touching are the testimonies of caregivers in palliative care units, and those of the Little Sisters of the Poor, who received numerous and moving confidences from the people they had cared for! How dear are these gratifying glances, the thanks for a presence, a listening, a gesture of gentleness and attention which gave them back the feeling that their life was precious, that they mattered to those around them, and that they themselves had value, even if they were ineffective and felt quite useless.
Support in the ordeal
The text currently being discussed in Parliament comes in a tense budgetary context, while the health system is going through a major crisis. However, the vast majority of caregivers, doctors and nurses, caring for people at the end of life, people suffering or living in very degraded living conditions, are opposed to this bill.
The legalization of euthanasia will result, among other things, in the abandonment of research, in particular on the fight against pain that is still unmanaged, since, for anyone who remains in pain, euthanasia will be the solution.
When the severity of the pathology does not respond to the treatment prescribed by the doctor, and the doctor feels powerless to stop the progression of the disease and cure his patient, the doctor, in his desire to find a solution, to cure his patient, can experience this lack of effectiveness as a personal failure.
During my career, I have seen too many doctors who no longer came to see their patients when things were going badly, believing they had betrayed their trust or, in certain cases, because their pride was offended. However, the patient, when he realizes that he cannot expect a cure, or simply an improvement in his state of health, does not expect the doctor to “do” but to “be”: to be present and attentive, not to abandon him, to accompany him through the ordeal and to listen to him.
Relieve pain
Without this dimension of care, it is logical that people ask, when faced with a heavy ordeal with no favorable outcome, to end their lives.
However, the considerable progress made in relieving pain and better knowledge of the specific needs at this stage of life, with the development of palliative care and personalized overall support, have made it possible to address the complaints of our patients in the majority of cases.
For all these reasons, we, caregivers, refuse to voluntarily shorten the lives of our patients. We call on all caregivers who share this ethic to refuse to push the syringe that kills.
About opinions
This text is signed by a guest author. He expresses his opinion and not that of the editorial staff. Our Live section aims to allow the expression of pluralism on religious, social and current affairs subjects, and to encourage dialogue, according to the criteria set by our editorial charter.
Share your opinion in comments or by writing to us at: readers.lacroix@groupebayard.com
