French Government Faces Delays in End-of-Life Law Debate Ahead of 2027 Election

The French government is actively working on two legislative proposals concerning end-of-life care, focused on palliative care and assisted dying, but political delays threaten to postpone final decisions until after the 2027 presidential election. Both proposals were adopted in first reading by the National Assembly in May but have not yet been reviewed by the Senate. Government spokesperson Maud Bregeon highlighted the urgency of resolving the debate before the upcoming presidential vote, emphasizing that parliamentary discussions must conclude beforehand.

Originally scheduled for consideration by the Senate starting October 7, the discussions were delayed due to political upheavals following the collapse of François Bayrou's government and the resignation—and subsequent reappointment—of Minister Sébastien Lecornu. The government now proposes that the Senate examine the two texts after the budget review, pushing the timeline further.

The proposal on palliative care enjoys broad support, but the assisted dying legislation remains highly controversial. The latter, introduced by MoDem deputy Olivier Falorni, aims to establish a "right to assisted dying," enabling patients to self-administer or receive lethal substances, effectively legalizing forms of assisted suicide or euthanasia without explicitly naming them in the text. Given the Senate's predominantly right-leaning composition, modifications to the assisted dying law are anticipated, which adds complexity to the legislative process.

With two readings required in both chambers, political observers express skepticism about reaching a definitive vote in time for the 2027 election. Bregeon insists on the importance of timely resolution, but ongoing political crises continue to hamper progress.

In summary, the French government's effort to legislate on sensitive end-of-life issues faces significant procedural delays, with an uncertain final timeline compounded by political instability and opposing viewpoints within parliament.