|
The
euthanasia lobby
On last 15 March, after a highly publicized trial, the Court of Assizes of
Dordogne condemned a doctor to one year suspended prison and discharged a
nurse. Sued for euthanasia by injection of lethal substance to a terminally
ill patient with cancer, the doctor Laurence Tramois and the nurse Chantal
Chanel, have benefited from the support of the Association for the right to
die in dignity (ADMD). On the eve of a major electoral date, the acts of the
current lobbying in favour of depenalisation of euthanasia may be compared
to those which led to the legalisation of abortion in 75. The “manifest of
the 2,000 caregivers” declaring they helped patients to die with decency
reminds the one of the “343 bitches” who in 1971 stated they practiced
illegal abortions, which open the way to the debate on abortion and its
depenalisation, ultra publicized trials in both cases, a hostage taking of
the reason by the compassion terrorism, etc.
Euthanasia in campaign
The debate on
euthanasia is in campaign. For Ségolène Royal, “a legalisation must be
set up enabling to soothe the most intolerable pains” and seizing the
Parliament with a “Vincent Humbert bill”. Nicolas Sarkozy talked
about a possible legalisation of euthanasia because “we cannot stay with
our arms dangling faced with the pain of one of our compatriots who calls
for end”. However, at the end of March, Nicolas
Sarkozy is against a law on euthanasia and prefers to be confident in
dialog between doctors and families.
Emergency in relieving pain
The supporters of a law on euthanasia call for the intolerable pain of end
of life patient whereas the law aimed at relieving this pain already exists.
“The texts outline perfectly the end of life and if cases of intolerable
pain are reported, this shows the law is not applied everywhere”. Marie
de Hennezel, psychologist and author, suggests the candidates first commit
themselves to applying these good practices of end of life, to making
obligatory the training of doctors for palliative cares, to financing
psychologist to support doctors and to making possible the accompaniment
leave foreseen by the law of 9 June 1999.
Towards a two-speed death?
Without these measures, Marie de Hennezel explains that we are going towards
a two-speed death: from one hand, recurring to palliative cares in which end
of life will be calmed; from the other, proposing no other issue than asking
for death to relieve pain. “Only 700 beds can welcome patients with
palliative cares whereas at least 10,000 people should benefit from”,
she adds.
Applying Leonetti law
According to Leonetti law of 22 April 2005, “acts of prevention,
investigation and care must not be done by an unreasonable obstinacy. When
they appear to be useless, disproportioned or having no other effect than
artificially maintaining life, they can be stopped or not undertaken”.
When voting this law, the government announced the opening of 1990
additional beds for palliative cares and the creation of 35 new mobile units
in 2005. We are still waiting for them.
Today the emergency is to give us the means
to apply this law. 
|
|
Consciousness objection
Consciousness objection consists in refusing to obey a civil law judged in
consciousness as seriously unfair. If a general agreement existed for
centuries on essential values which founded political authority and social
balances, today these values are subject to a constant theoretical and
practical questioning. In a world marked by relativism, the tolerance
transformed to the point to become a real political instrument which has
fearsome totalitarianism and exclusion forces.
Ideological tolerance
The act to refuse in consciousness to obey an
unfair law occurs today in this context of ideological tolerance which, by
nature, is not disposed to support it. The society ideologically tolerant
cannot tolerate the consciousness objection, because it escapes from its
empire.
By saying, “all opinions are equivalent”, the
“ideological tolerant” states as a general rule which is only an opinion
amongst others, according to his own statement. He only can go out from this
deadlock by violence which makes him say : if you contradict me when I tell
that all opinions are equivalent, you are a dangerous intolerant to fight by
all means. The ideological tolerance wants to force itself on everybody.
What tolerance cannot tolerate
A tolerant society cannot tolerate what puts in danger its unstable and
contradictory balance, meaning that a truth to look for exists and
that this truth may have a universal feature. From then on, any fundamental
debate must be evacuated, free from ethical implications and
transformed into exchange of relative ideas. Thus, the positive statement of
the human dignity as a truth valid for all is rejected ; then
everything becomes possible except the fact to respect the man
unconditionally.
The case of abortion
This way in the contemporaneous
culture, abortion became a good thing not only for the person free to
practice it, but also for the society itself which enables, encourages,
promotes and finances it. The ideology which established and then encouraged
abortion, by presenting it as a personal right for women, deprived the
society of any possibility to serenely think about the fundamental question
of embryo respect, fearing that this legislative choice is questioned. In so
doing, it has not anymore the capacity to ethically face the challenges
represented by a certain number of medico-surgical practices and
manipulations linked to medical research.
From tolerance to totalitarianism
The example of abortion in France shows that a tolerant society cannot
tolerate that a right of consciousness objection is exercised within this
society, because it is not able to accept, by honouring them, the superior
values which express in it. Then it chooses consensual values, among which,
some lead it to death¹. How to exercise this consciousness objection ? At
the electoral time the question is concrete.
1. Histoire de l’objection de conscience et différentes
acceptions du concept de tolérance – Prof. Jean Laffitte, Académie
pontificale pour la Vie, XIIIe assemblée générale, 24 février 2007 |
|
Life as a challenge
"The doctor who practices the ultrasonography,
a woman, seems to be worried :
- There is a problem. Immediately I understand and as instinctively that
it is serious, and I heard :
- Is she going to die ? (Why did I speak first about death ?)
- Yes." The doctor explains delicately that the child has a cerebral
malformation which jeopardizes his life.
With emotion
Sophie, mother of a heavily handicapped young girl who should not live and
today is seven years old, makes us penetrate into the closed world of a
medical practice where there are so many human mysteries. The questions from
Sophie and Damien, her husband, followed on. Then the sonographer understood
they wanted to “keep” the child. Disconcerted by this decision, she started
a strange dialog with the parents, with state of shock. "No", first
it is not by religious conviction but by simple humanity reaction, "this
is parents’ reaction", Sophie answered. "No", by saying that they
do not judge the others, how could they do it, they are not in the mood to
philosophize in this moment of shock ? Sophie’s mind navigates other waters,
between one thousand questions about the child, her pain, her life, her
death, their anxiety of parents.
This way the injured maternity of Sophie began. To live her maternity
starting by mourning... "It is a really strange feeling to live
constantly with this threat of death, whereas I feel my baby alive." "To
love in emergency." "I know I have to live all this without rejecting
anything, the pain, the softness, the love. I am at my place." Then the
birth erased the darkness previsions on delivery. "Now I am full of joy
to have given birth and not death." After this joy, she, her husband,
and the medical team had to learn to welcome the handicap, and then the
hopeless return to home, with Philippine in their arms, alive.
Life calls life
The parents are projected to the limits of life and its meaning. As if
Philippine pressed the heart of her parents to extract blood and water. "With
Philippine we are at the limits of life. (...) I wonder about the
meaning of her life but also about the meaning of my life." "Remaining
exterior to Philippine means to send her to death and nothingness. Being in
contact with her, on the contrary means to integrate her into her life and
into mine."
Questioning
Everything that is not true does not resist, even the most intimate
convictions. "What is the meaning of her life? She serves for nothing.
But, finally, do I serve for something ?" "Do discount lives exist ?"
"Why did I not want to interrupt pregnancy ?" "What were my
reasons ?"
The author deals with the questions she has for seven years.
- First intellectual and philosophical questioning : on what do Philippine’s
humanity and dignity rely ?
- Then psychological questioning : how to tend parents’, couple’s, brothers’
and sisters’ wounds ?
- Finally spiritual questioning : What meaning may have pain ? Philippine’s
life is a mystery. "During the pregnancy and this so painful waiting
time, my faith concentrates on Jesus crucified." "I cannot pry
another way, I simply look at the Crucified who says "why ?"" Sophie
goes ahead: trying to cut the suffering from the pain, in order not to be
left in a destroying spiral.
Inner unit
Without catastrophism or angelism, Sophie looks at the passed seven
years with moments of joy and pain, the experience of solidarity and lack of
understanding, the daily fights and political fights (Perruche judgement).
Delicately she reminds her souvenirs and emotions, to find out the meaning.
More than a testimony, this is the modestly story of her inner experience,
where the deep force prevails over the threat. The reader will not be
insensitive to this experience of truth in which an exceptional unit of
intelligence, heart and soul reveals with talent.
1. Philippine, la force d'une vie fragile,
Sophie Chevillard-Lutz, ed.de l’Emmanuel, février 2007 |
