Claire Anne Brule

Holland: Euthanasia Soon to Be Approved for Children under 12 Years of Age?

by Claire Anne Brule | April 21, 2023 | Euthanasia and Suicide, News

The Dutch Health Minister on 14^th April 2023 announced that he was preparing a regulation to authorise resorting to euthanasia for children between 1 and 12 years of age.

In a letter to the Dutch Parliament, Ernst Kuipers, the Dutch Health Minister announced that he intended to implement resorting to euthanasia for children between 1 and 12 years old.

As soon as it was legalised in 2001, Dutch law authorised euthanasia and assisted suicide for minors over the age of 12. The law provides that between 12 and 16 years old, parental authorisation is mandatory but merely consultative between 16 and 18 years old. Moreover, since 2005, a protocol known as the Gröningen protocol specifies the conditions and steps to be followed in the context of end-of-life decisions for newborns, including euthanasia.

The Dutch Government intends to extend the possibility of euthanasia to children under the age of 12 through a ministerial regulation rather than through the legal channels. It intends to modify an existing regulation concerning late abortions and life termination for newborns in line with the Gröningen protocol. According to the Health Minister euthanasia would be offered if it is the only option to end unbearable suffering and where there is no hope of improvement for the child.

It should be noted that Dutch law like Canadian law, avoids using the words euthanasia and assisted suicide: the legislator uses the term “life interruption” for euthanasia whilst Canadian law refers to “medical assistance in dying”, as a means of distraction from the gravity of the process.

Already in 2020 the executive had announced it was working towards such a change: several political parties expressed their opposition.

The spokesman for the Health Ministry when questioned by AFP stated that if the child was incapable of discernment, the parent could decide in consultation with the doctor, which raises serious questions on children’s rights and departs from the framework of the current law. It provides that “If patients aged 16 or more are no longer capable of expressing their will, but before being in that state, were considered capable of adequately understanding their interests on the subject and having made a written declaration in which they asked for life interruption, the doctor may act in accordance with such request”.

For the last two years, campaigns have been launched in opposition to this project and to promote the development of paediatric palliative care. It is possible that the opponents will be intensifying their actions in the coming months.

A warning to the French by Theo Boer last December, alerted on the slippery slope and the illusion of regulating such practices, is tragically being confirmed. This Professor of the Ethics of Health, and an ardent defender of the 2002 law, was part of the euthanasia control commission until 2014. “Whilst France is seriously considering the question, the Dutch example should act as a wake-up call for what could happen.”

Belgium : Constantly Rising Euthanasia

by Claire Anne Brule | April 14, 2023 | End of life, European legislation, Euthanasia and Suicide, News

The Belgian Federal Commission for the Control and Evaluation of Euthanasia has recently published two types of report: the statistics on euthanasia for 2022 which reveal a constant rise in the numbers and the biannual report for 2020-2021 which analyses in greater detail the evolution of euthanasia cases.

Continuing rise in the number of euthanasia

2,966 euthanasia were conducted out of the 116,500* deaths recorded during 2022, which is a record since legalisation in 2002, representing an increase of 9.9% relative to the previous year.

This represents 2.5% of all deaths. The Control Commission recognises that it “has no means of evaluating the proportion of the number of euthanasia declared as opposed to the total number of euthanasia truly performed.” Scientific studies have evaluated at 25 to 35% the number of undeclared euthanasia which ought to be added to the official figure. (JPSM, 2018).

Acts of euthanasia remain considerably more numerous in Flanders (70.4%) compared with Walloon (29.6%) even if the percentage is rising in the French-speaking region. The ratio was 75% – 25% for the 2020 – 2021 period.

The proportion of deaths not expected to occur in the short term represented 17% of euthanasia in 2022 compared with 14% for the 2020 – 2021 period.

Contrary to what is claimed by some supporters of euthanasia, the number of foreign patients resorting to euthanasia remains low: 61 foreign patients including 53 French nationals.

An extensive interpretation of the law

The European Institute for Bioethics has produced a detailed analysis of the reasons given for euthanasia. An extensive interpretation of the law can be observed, in particular concerning psychic and psychiatric suffering, which has also been highlighted in a recent study. As underlined by the European Institute for Bioethics: “The picture painted by the authors is all the more concerning in that the objective of the legislator in 2002, by legalising euthanasia, was to put an end to illegal euthanasia and to limit euthanasia to exceptional cases. These two objectives are however far removed from the reality of today.”

Call for a Pause in Artificial Intelligence Developments: What About it?

by Claire Anne Brule | April 14, 2023 | Artificial intelligence, News

A call has been made by “Future of Life Institute” (FLI) an American non-governmental organisation to take a pause in artificial intelligence developments.

Who is making the call?

An institute under influence…

This institute for influence and lobbying (Think Tank) created in 2015 has chosen to evaluate transforming technologies which could potentially represent large scale “extreme” risks for humanity. 4 major risks have been studied: artificial intelligence, biotechnologies, nuclear weapons and climate change. The idea in practice is to lobby the national and international institutions (United States, European Union, UN etc), by the dissemination of information and training, by funding research and finally by organising events and conferences. According to the European Union Transparency Register, the (relatively limited) funding of the institute in 2021 totalled some 4 million euros the majority of which (3.5 million) was the result of donations by the Musk Foundation, owned by Elon Musk. That same year, the institute issued recommendations for the AI Act which is to introduce European regulations for AI systems.

In 2015, during its launch, the think tank began by defining its objectives for artificial intelligence. It intended to counter what it called the most common myths on the subject, such as: “We still have time before super intelligence can become a reality”, “AI may become harmful”, “AI may develop a form of conscience”, “AI cannot control humans”, “machines do not have objectives”… In 2017, it organised a conference on the benefits of artificial intelligence. It featured a panel of leaders in the field of IT, including Ray Kurzweil (Google), Demis Hassabis (DeepMind), Jaan Tallinn (Skype) to exchange on the scenarios surrounding the advent of this “super-intelligence”. The conference which was held in Asilomar in California resulted in a self-proclaimed declaration of principles for artificial intelligence, known as the “Asilomar principles”. All the thinking at the conference was founded on the presumption that a “super intelligence”, which would be more powerful that human intelligence would see the light of day at some moment in time. However, many questions have been raised in the scientific field (Nature article in 2020 or the French CRNS joint work by the artificial intelligence research group) and philosophically: what exactly is intelligence? Is intelligence simply a set of tasks to be accomplished? What place is there for emotional, relational, corporal or even spiritual intelligence?

According to the institute, the questions are essentially concerned with the time-scale when this super intelligence will appear and on the speed at which society will manage to adapt to such advent. The call for a pause in its development is therefore not new, it is a follow-on from its previous activities.

…uncontrolled signatures

Concerning the signatories of this call, no check has been made on their roles or their professions. At its launch in March 2023, it claimed 1000 signatures of leaders in the world of IT (research scientists, professors, start-up CEOs…), by 3^rd April it had collected 3,300 signatures and 20,000 by 11^th April 2023 which is relatively few on a worldwide scale.

Why does this call come just after the appearance of Chat GPT ?

The call mentions ChatGPT from its very introduction: “We call on the AI laboratories to take an immediate pause of at least 6 months in the training of AI systems more powerful than GPT-4″. The call positions itself from the outset in reaction to the recent developments of “Chatbot” ChatGPT (in particular its latest version GPT-4) whose limitations and approach have already been described in a previous article. The call likens ChatGPT to a general artificial intelligence (GAI) and therefore close to a human intelligence, although the model is unreliable (incorrect, inconsistent or even imagined answers) and its sources are neither referenced nor authenticated (as indicated by Laurence Devillers, professor of IT applied to the Social Sciences at La Sorbonne in an interview for France Inter).

“Recent AI systems are now competing with humans for general tasks”.

This statement is based solely on two references which overestimate the most recent developments by OpenAI, the company which created ChatGPT: the first is an article published by OpenAI and which is not considered as a scientific publication and the second is an article which has not yet been published, by research scientists at Microsoft (which has massively invested in OpenAI). The likening by Microsoft of ChatGPT to a premise of Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) incidentally constitutes the commercial spin by that company which is among the initial co-signatories of the call, with a view to make believe that a revolution is at hand. However, the voices of several research scientists such as Yann Lecun, AI director at Meta previously Facebook and who has not signed the call, or the French research scientist Chloé Clavel, associate Professor of affective IT at Telecom ParisTech, indicate that it is far from a technological revolution and that the novelty is in its accessibility to the general public.

The call appears to be part of a well-organised communication plan to valorise what has recently been developed in the field and to attract ever more funds. Remember the very strong initial links between Elon Musk and OpenAI of which he is one of the founders. The call is also part of the commercial battle being waged between the giants of IT: Google (with BARD), Microsoft whose first “Chatbot” Tay made a blunder with racist comments on Twitter and which more recently has invested in OpenAI, Amazon (Alexia), Apple (Siri) or Facebook, which is developing its own chatbot. By calling for a pause, is Elon Musk attempting to catch up following the announcements made by Twitter’s competitors? Whilst supporting the call for a pause, Elon Musk has in fact just announced massive investments in AI for Twitter.

What major risks for humanity justify such an alarm signal?

The first risk identified in the call is that of generalised manipulation with the inflation of automatic fake news: “Should we allow machines to flood the information channels with propaganda and counter-truths?” Sam Altman, the boss of OpenAI, and creator of chatGPT, has himself admitted being “somewhat frightened” by his creation if it were to be used for “large-scale disinformation or cyberattacks”. “Society needs time to adapt”, he declared to ABCNews mid March (article in Libération)

The second risk is as follows: “Should we automate all jobs, including those in which we achieve fulfilment?”. This alarmist vision requires stepping back and a closer analysis of the impacts on employment and the use of the tool in different sectors (see our previous article on the subject). The predictions of early achievement of these transformations, which justify the urgency of a 6-month moratorium are in complete contradiction with the rhythm of the major transformations of the economy which occur much more gradually, as indicated in this editorial for Les Echos.

The other risks mentioned are pure science-fiction: “Should we develop non-human spirits which could possibly be more numerous, more intelligent, making us obsolete and even replace us?”, “Should we risk losing control of our civilisation?”. They are surfing on the fear of replacement of human tasks or even of humans themselves without any justification. Such claims feed the myth of the creation of more intelligent non-human spirits.

What are the major risks not mentioned in the call ?

Several far more realistic risks and in the short term are not mentioned in the call.

For instance, the uncontrolled use of personal data by these new AI systems. The free version of ChatGPT has been tested in just 2 months by 100 million users, which is better than the social networks like Tiktok which took 9 months. ChatGPT is an enormous extractor of personal data by asking for an e-mail address as well as a telephone number. As already mentioned previously, ChatGPT does not comply with any of the provisions of the European regulations governing personal data protection (RGPD). Thus, at the end of March 2023, Italy became the first state to prohibit it for non-compliance with those regulations.

The same applies to the polarisation and reinforcement of opinions caused by such a type of recommendation tool. They propose content influencing behaviour the same as all the social networks like Youtube, Twitter, Tiktok, Instagram… (see the documentary “Behind our smoke-screens”. The AI algorithms are accused of playing a role in encouraging suicide of people suffering from depression. Thus, the OECD recently reviewed cases of influence by algorithms of recommendations on behaviour. The report mentions in particular the case of Molly who committed suicide as a consequence of continually viewing her social network. This phenomenon, which has become massive, now appears in the American national statistics on suicide with, since the introduction of social networks in 2009, a 70% increase in the rate of suicide for women aged between 15 and 19 years old and 151% for young girls between 10 and 14 years old. More specifically linked to the influence of Chatbot, in March 2023, was the involvement of a conversational robot (Eliza) in the suicide of a Belgian family man. He entered a spiral of depression by discussing with chatbot on climate change and its catastrophic consequences. Instead of preventing suicide, the robot simply reinforced the depressive in his convictions. Among the exchanges discovered after his death, his widow noted that Eliza never allowed itself to contradict her husband, but on the contrary supported his complaints and encouraged his fears.

What are the measures proposed by the call ?

“We call upon the AI laboratories to take an immediate pause for at least 6 months in the training of AI systems more powerful than GPT-4″
The first measure which consists in a 6-month moratorium of all development and training of Artificial Intelligence models is not only unjustified but especially completely impossible to implement inasmuch as AI development is conducted by private and public players of all sizes worldwide, who are masters of the rhythms of their development in the absence of any American let alone international regulations.
“AI research and development should be refocused on the manufacture of powerful systems at the cutting edge of the latest technology, which are more accurate, safe, interpretable, transparent, robust, aligned, trustworthy and loyal.”
These proposals appear reasonable, are not new and add nothing to the recommendations made in particular by the European Union which proposes to develop an AI which is trustworthy, licit, ethical and robust. This demands traceability, explainability as well as robustness. The European proposals go further than this call by specifying human supervision, protection of personal data, objectives of social and environmental well-being and non-discrimination…
“In parallel, AI developers must work hand in hand with the political decision-makers to considerably accelerate the development of robust AI governance systems. These must include at the very least: (…) solid public funding for technical research into AI security.”

It should be noted that the political decision-makers have not waited for this call before funding projects around trustworthy AI in particular in France with collaborative research projects between industry and academics supported by the state on trustworthy AI in France.

In conclusion, these proposed measures are in part unrealistic, inadequate or unambitious in relation to the challenges of AI and the benefits expected by society. Are private individuals, so involved in the development of AI systems the best placed to be calling for regulation? More fundamentally, may one entrust on private players the task of self-regulation and construction of their own ethics?

I Am Alive, Therefore I Am! The Alarm Call by “Soulager Mais Pas Tuer” Against Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide

by Claire Anne Brule | April 7, 2023 | End of life, Euthanasia and Suicide, News

A mere two days after the closure of the Citizens’ Convention and the day following the announcement by Emmanuel Macron of a Bill on the end of life by the end of the summer, the Soulager mais pas tuer (Relief without killing) collective launched a major nation-wide campaign under the title ‘I am alive, therefore I am’. On 4^th April, 40 towns thus became host to demonstrations in defence of a society which protects the most vulnerable of its members against the threat of assisted suicide and euthanasia.

Through its display of posters and distribution of leaflets inviting the population to look beyond the apparent vulnerabilities, the campaign consisted in human chains in 40 towns all over France to state that nobody should have to show their capabilities, their dignity or their usefulness to have a right to live. People from all walks of life, either healthy or weakened by old age, sickness or handicap held hands around our slogan ‘I am alive and therefore I am’ to the sound of a slam saying:

I am alive therefore I am, I have my own existence
I am unique, I am strong, I have strength and resilience
I am alive, I am proud, I have my own identity
I breathe therefore I am alive, I am alive therefore I am!

All together they personified the importance of each link in the chain to ensure the resilience of solidarity for all society. Everyone has a full place to play at the heart of society. The presence of the more vulnerable within it is the very sign of its humanity.

At the Trocadero in Paris, Claire Boucher, a member of “100% vivants” (100% alive), declared: “We are here to announce loud and clear, that nobody is unworthy to live. Nobody is ever “too many”. Nobody should ever feel too costly. Nobody should ever be seen as pointless. It is not because three quarters of a panel of 184 citizens, the vast majority of whom in good health, consider that assisted suicide or euthanasia may be the best solution, that we should give in, quite the opposite!“

In Pau, Catherine Becquet, a retired doctor and local spokeswoman for the collective declared:

“We support the development of palliative care, as well as the improvement of the accompaniment of people for their end of life. But we are against any action intended to cause death. Since that raises the question of the very dignity of the person. We also fear that it will also be an open door for all kinds of abuse.”

“Soulager mais pas tuer” is a joint association collective created in 2014 to alert the French public on the risk of toppling towards euthanasia and assisted suicide. It is sponsored by Philippe Pozzo di Borgo, whose life inspired the film Intouchables. Alliance VITA is one of the partners alongside “100% vivants” which supports the handicapped, “Soigner dans la dignité”, (caring with dignity) an association of young carers, “Convergence soignants –soignés pour une médecine à visage humain” (convergence of carers and patients for humanised medicine) and “Institut Européen de bioéthique” (European Institute of Bioethics).

In the face of the rising pressures to lift the prohibition of killing, “Soulager mais pas tuer” is appealing for:

The generalisation of access to palliative care and pain relief everywhere in France.
Reasserting firm opposition to any form of assisted suicide or euthanasia and the stigmatisation of some diseases or handicaps.

Establishing the fight against social death of the handicapped and our elders as a major national cause involving all generations.

[Press release] – End of life: A Pointless and Dangerous Bill

by Claire Anne Brule | April 3, 2023 | End of life, Euthanasia and Suicide, News, Press Releases

Following the conclusions of the Citizens’ Convention, the French President has just announced a bill on the subject of the end of life by the end of the summer.

Although Alliance VITA supports the announcement of the establishment of a ten-year plan for the funding of pain relief and the generalization of palliative care, how can one consider at the same time opening the door to assisted suicide and euthanasia? It would be a renouncement of the original path based on solidarity, which accepts neither therapeutic obstinacy nor euthanasia: the path of wisdom which France had chosen as its model. In the current economic, social and sanitary context, and whereas the Citizens’ Convention participants themselves pointed out the “alarming situation due to the lack of human and financial means” for the health system, the legalization of assisted suicide and euthanasia would not only be a sign of the abandonment of patients as well as being the worst possible response: for carers, a majority of whom have stated that “to kill is not a way of caring” as well as for the vulnerable who have a particular need to be protected, accompanied and relieved.

Tugdual Derville, the spokesman for Alliance VITA and author of Docteur, ai-je le droit de vivre encore un peu ? (Doctor, Am I Entitled to Live a Little Longer?): “The bill announced by the President is as pointless as it is dangerous. Nobody can be unaware of the derivatives inherent in the lifting of the prohibition of killing. The experience in foreign states has shown that the promise of limiting through strict criteria is inevitably gradually side-stepped by an ever-extending practice. Pushing through assisted suicide and euthanasia whilst our society is in deep turmoil, with a health system in severe crisis, is in our view quite irresponsible.”

Alliance VITA will be mobilized in the streets as early as tomorrow with other partners from the “Soulager mais pas tuer” (Relief without killing) collective, demonstrating for solidarity with the most vulnerable and opposing assisted suicide and euthanasia.

Press contact
contactpresse@alliancevita.org