by NexDev | June 23, 2016 | Medically Assisted Procreation
During the June 21, 2016 session, during which the new report “Human Rights and ethical questions related to surrogacy” should have been examined, the Committee for Social Affairs of the Parliamentary Assembly at the Council of Europe suspended the work for procedural reasons.
This new report, which is highly controversial, was presented by Petra De Sutter, Belgian Senator and gynecologist. This is the repeat occurrence for this rapporteur, for whom there was a conflict of interest cited, since she personally practices surrogacy in her professional activity. Her relationship with an Indian Clinique was also revealed. Her first report was rejected last March 15: it planned European guidelines for surrogacy, in other words to authorize this practice, contrary to Human Rights.
No Maternity Traffic, of which Alliance VITA is a partner, « remains attentive to the Committee’s decision on Rules of Procedure, who is expected to rule on certain procedural irregularities, especially whether the committee can remove the rapporteur of her functions.”
Alliance VITA supports No Maternity Traffic “for the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe to reject and condemn all forms of surrogacy as contrary to human rights and human dignity.”
_____________________
June 22, 2016 Press Release from No Maternity Traffic
by NexDev | June 21, 2016 | End of life, Laws, surveys, protagonists, News
On Friday June 17, 2016 the Canadian Parliament voted a law for medically assisted dying, legalizing euthanasia and assisted suicide in a widely encompassing manner, and seen as worrisome for those who defend the most vulnerable individuals.
Known under the title “Medical Assistance in Dying (MAID)”, it’s really euthanasia and assisted suicide which have been legalized in a widely encompassing manner, in contradiction to what was announced by the majority of the French media.
A Supreme Court judgment in the country – in the case of Carter vs. Canada, on February 6, 2015, – found that articles in the Criminal Law prohibiting assisted suicide and euthanasia were in violation of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and thereby unconstitutional. In view of this decision, completely opposite of that made in 1993; the government was given one year to revise its legislation, with a 6-month extension given at the beginning of 2016.
The government could have contested this judgment, but it decided to legislate and thus introduced its C-14 bill on medical assistance in dying last April 14. This federal law arrives after the province of Quebec legalized euthanasia in 2015, following heated controversy.
Article 241.1 of the new law provides the following definition of medical assistance in dying « According to the situation, the fact for a doctor or nurse practitioner:
- a) to administer to an individual, at his request, a substance which causes his death;
- b) to prescribe or to furnish a substance to an individual, at his request, in order that the product be administered and thus cause his death.”
In addition, the pharmacists who deliver the lethal products are also concerned.
On the other hand, it is foreseen that supplementary individuals may be involved. According to article 227(2): “An individual who does something in view of helping the doctor or nurse practitioner furnish medical aid to die is not liable of participating in a homicide (…)».
As well as the eligibility criteria being broad and highly subjective, according to article 227(3), the doctor or nurse establishing the requirements is allowed to have “a mistaken belief” without being held liable.
According to article 241.2 establishing the prerequisite requirements, the individual must be at least 18 years old and be « in grievous and irremediable medical conditions ». This expression signifies that “the disease, illness, disability or the advanced state of irreversible decline in capability causes enduring and unbearable physical or psychological pain which cannot be alleviated in a manner the person deems tolerable”, and that “natural death is reasonably foreseeable as an inevitable outcome due to the overall medical situation, without, however, any specific prognosis having been established concerning the individual’s life-expectancy.”
In addition to a second opinion from a doctor or nurse practitioner, a 10 day waiting period is mandated from the time of the written request by the individual, and the enactment of euthanasia or assisted suicide. Only the medical personnel can authorize shortening this waiting period, when “the individual’s death or his incapacity to provide an informed consent appears imminent”. In the event of his incapacity to sign and date the request “ a third party, at least 18 years of age and who understands the nature of the request for medical aid in dying, can sign for him, in his presence and according to his wishes.”
A « clarification » was added at the end of the 241.2 article, introducing a conscience clause stating “It is understood that the present article does not compel anyone to furnish or to help furnish medical help to die.”
During the discussions and in view of the bill’s content, it appears to merely be a step and that very soon euthanasia of minors or individuals suffering from mental illness will be examined. In fact, article 9.1 stipulates that “Within 180 days following the date of the act receiving assent, the Ministers of Justice and Health submit one or more independent examinations of questions concerning request for medical aid in dying from mature minors, future requests, and requests where mental illness is the only medical condition specified.”
In contrast to the regulatory framework in the Netherlands or in Belgium, no prior or subsequent control commission has been put into place. It is only planned that following four years of enactment, a Parliamentary committee examine the bill’s provisions as well as the situation of palliative care in Canada. This committee is then to submit a report “which would include any modifications they might want to recommend”.
by NexDev | June 21, 2016 | Press Releases
The rejection of two draft bills aiming to strengthen the ban on surrogacy is an alarming sign of immobility at a time when it is urgent to fight against surrogacy in Europe and in the world. Alliance VITA asks the government to commit into effective provisions on an international scale to protect women and children.
The rejection of these two draft bills* on June 21st at the French National Assembly comes at a time when the principle of banning surrogacy has been undermined in France and in Europe throughout these past years, whereas the European Parliament had just recently condemned all forms of surrogacy by a large majority vote.
Tugdual Derville, Alliance VITA’s General Delegate states: “We regret that besides a few exceptions a partisan stronghold has materialized today around a subject which should incite consensus, since from an official standpoint, France is opposed to the practice of surrogacy. Why is the government so passive when the Prime Minister formally committed more than 600 days ago to passing such legislation? We are still waiting for the promised diplomatic provisions, first for resisting the import market of surrogacy and to sound an international warning on the indignity of this practice that seriously violates Human Rights. In any event, we take note of these parliamentary opposition initiatives. It is up to them to confirm this objective by including it in the presidential agenda. Only in this way the childhood protection will become a political priority.”
Today this debate is also being carried out at an international level.
In fact the same day at the Council of Europe, a new report project and draft resolution study was presented on ethical issues related to surrogacy and Human Rights. It concerns a very controversial study in terms of its content as well as of the procedure which is completely lacking in clearness and transparency.
Caroline Roux, Director at Vita International, reminds: «On an international level, France is expected to pronounce an opinion. Who will protect women everywhere from the ultra liberal market and from using their bodies as instruments? Who will protect children from the inherent abuse resulting from this rupture in maternity and its resulting traffic? Keep in mind that having recourse to surrogate mothers constitutes a serious infringement of women’s and children’s rights and the Council of Europe must guarantee the respect of human rights. Countries such as India, Mexico, Nepal and Thailand are currently revising their legislation, realizing that women are exploited in an inhumane manner in their countries. This should be encouraged by the French people.”
Alliance VITA is actively involved in the No Maternity Traffic petition, obtaining more than 100,000 European signatures demanding an international prohibition of surrogacy.
__________________
*Reminder for the two draft bills:
- The first bill aimed at obtaining constitutional recognition for the principle of the inalienability of the human body.
- The second draft bill aimed at fighting against surrogacy. It would reinforce criminal offences, mainly against the intermediaries promoting surrogacy. The bill would specify that foreign civil status registers would not be recognized in France for cases where surrogacy is practiced abroad. It also recommends that France propose adopting an international convention banning reproductive and gestational surrogacy.
by NexDev | June 16, 2016 | Disabled, Euthanasia and Suicide, Press Releases
Alliance VITA expresses deep concern following the decision announced by the Administrative Appeals Court in Nancy, demanding for the collegial decision-making procedure to be resumed. This could lead to withdrawing life-sustaining treatment and to Vincent Lambert’s death.
Alliance VITA believes that resuming the collegial decision-making procedure must imperatively include the option of having Vincent Lambert transferred to another Medical Center better adapted to his medical situation. In view of developments in his current condition since July 2015, there is no reason to consider that the only option is stopping care, thereby ensuring his death by discontinuing artificial nutrition and hydration.
In July 2015, the medical team at the Reims Medical Center decided to suspend this procedure, and requested for the court to name a legal representative for this man who can no longer speak. This was a wise choice since it leaves Vincent Lambert’s future open for discussion. Next July 8th, a different Appeals Court, in Reims, will decide on the individual most appropriate to fulfill the role of this legal representative.
Tugdual Derville, Alliance VITA’s General Delegate and author of « The Battle of Euthanasia » (Salvator editions):“It is no small paradox in this sad affair, that after offering surprising media coverage to a simple nephew contesting the mother’s position, the court endorsed this request from a member outside the immediate family. The treatment inflicted on Mrs. Vivianne Lambert is completely opposite from that which Mrs. Marie Humbert benefitted, when she decided to provoke the death of her son in 2003…
« To take care of one’s child, to protect him, to request appropriate care for him…how can such a maternal request not be respected? In what manner is the continuation of Vincent Lambert’s life so annoying that procedures have to be invented to terminate his life? Many families and many care-takers with heavily dependent individuals feel uneasy and are understandably fearful faced with these surprising judicial turnarounds which confirm the inconsistency around this painful situation.
To seek conciliation, we should start by offering Vincent appropriate care, which was refused. To commit euthanasia, without ever pronouncing the word, when Vincent cannot voice his opinion, would be completely hypocritical, and would open Pandora’s Box for other similar cases. To protect patients especially when they are most vulnerable, and continue to provide appropriate care is, on the contrary, a genuine sign of true humanity.”
by NexDev | June 16, 2016 | Press Releases
Alliance VITA is supporting 2 draft bills* to be examined Thursday, June 16th at the National Assembly to reinforce the current law banning surrogacy in France, which had been undermined over the past 3 years.
For the past few months, Alliance VITA has continued to express its concern for the undermining of the ban on surrogacy. Initially, the so-called “Taubira directive” published in January 2013 made it easier to issue French nationality certificates to children born abroad to a surrogate mother. Then in June 2014 the ECHR condemned France for refusing to register civil status for births in the United States to surrogate mothers, and specified that the parental relationship with the biological father should be recognized. In July, the French Court of Cassation upheld the ECHR decision, henceforth authorizing the paternal relationship to be registered on the French civil status, associated with the name of the mother who gave birth, meaning the surrogate mother, when it was already registered on the foreign birth registry. Finally on March 7, 2016, the Appeals Court in Rennes ruled that only the paternal relationship should be registered on the French civil registry, whereas the existence of the mother who gave birth would be totally ignored.
This complete reversal in French case law has considerably undermined the dissuasive effect for the ban on surrogacy in France, since henceforth this evasion of the law, even when established, is no longer taken into account, nor does it imply any negative consequences.
In light of this background, Alliance VITA participated in the hearings organized by the Law Commission, and demanded that the law prohibiting surrogacy be reinforced.
Tugdual Derville, General Delegate for Alliance VITA states: « These two draft bills are primarily a means of testing the current opposition. Will opponents still be courageous enough to remain unanimously strong in their position against the abuse which is inherent in all forms of surrogacy? This could be a harbinger of an ethical reawakening, in the context of a possible change in the political majority. Indeed, until now, whenever the right wing was in power, they tended to endorse all the libertarian drifts imposed by the left wing. Fortunately, even on the left, there is now a number of voices denouncing the regression that surrogacy represents. This subject goes beyond partisan differences…”
Caroline Roux, Director of VITA International confirms: “For all those concerned about procreation ethics, it is extremely troubling to see this “procreation market” being imported into France. To have recourse to surrogacy is a serious violation of the rights of women and children. France would be forsaking its ethical foundations by allowing an ultra-liberal procreation business. This is why the two draft bills go far beyond the traditional left-right political dichotomy: there has to be agreement by all who support human dignity, women’s rights and the protection of children. We need to have a clear legislation, as in the bill being proposed, and it needs to be fully enforced. It is essential that the rule of law be implemented effectively.”
Alliance VITA is also actively involved in the No Maternity Traffic petition, which obtained more than 100,000 European signatures demanding an international ban on surrogacy. This petition has just been recognized as admissible by the Council of Europe, which transmitted it to the Committee on Social Affairs to be included in the current study on Surrogacy and Human Rights. Scheduled to be examined during the session next June 21 – 22 this study is a major risk. It is essential that France and its Parliamentary Representatives fight for an explicit and universal condemnation of Surrogacy.
*Reminder concerning the two draft bills:
- The first bill is aimed at obtaining constitutional recognition for the principle of the inalienability of the human body.
The second draft bill is aimed at fighting against surrogacy. It would reinforce criminal sanctions, mainly against the intermediaries promoting surrogacy. The bill would specify that foreign civil status cannot be recognized in France for cases resulting from a surrogacy practiced abroad. It also recommends that France propose adopting an international convention banning reproductive and gestational surrogacy.
