FranceMembers only yesterday4Add to bookmarks

On June 30, 2026, the National Assembly adopted the final text on assisted dying. A historic vote, fragile in its legal foundations, heavy with consequences for the Church and Catholic caregivers.
Week after week, we had followed the progress of the law on assisted dying. On June 30, 2026, the National Assembly voted on the final text in a solemn vote that the French episcopate described as historic—and not without reason.
The final hours before the vote revealed internal fractures within the majority. Minister Camille Galliard-Minier found herself in public contradiction with her own position as a deputy on the notion of "natural death"—a reflection of the text's legal inconsistency. Some parliamentarians admitted voting "with a trembling hand." Cardinal Sarah, alongside the French episcopate, issued a final warning: "Not every law approved by a Parliament is just." Emmanuel Hirsch and Laurent Frémont, co-founders of the collective Démocratie, éthique et solidarité, wrote in La Croix: "The law that was meant to proclaim our fraternity will proclaim our abdication." Meanwhile, the Church prepares for the aftermath: the Little Sisters of the Poor fear closing their facilities, and Catholic caregivers question the effectiveness of the conscience clause.
The Gospel of Life is unambiguous. John Paul II, in Evangelium Vitae (n. 65), states: "Euthanasia is a grave violation of the law of God, as it is the deliberate and morally unacceptable killing of a human person." The Catechism of the Catholic Church (n. 2277) specifies that any act or omission which, of itself or by intention, causes death to eliminate suffering constitutes murder, even if presented as compassionate. These texts leave no room for parliamentary casuistry.
The economic argument put forward by some proponents of the law—legalizing to reduce healthcare costs—directly contradicts the Church's social doctrine. Gaudium et Spes (n. 27) lists among intrinsically evil acts "all forms of voluntary homicide." No budgetary imperative can justify them.
The immediate issue is that of institutional conscience. The text as submitted for the vote does not guarantee Catholic institutions the right to refuse organizing assisted dying within their walls. The French Church enters a period of institutional and spiritual resistance. The question of maintaining Catholic healthcare facilities—hospitals, retirement homes, palliative care services—is no longer theoretical.
The Galliard-Minier contradiction illustrates a deeper phenomenon: this text is being voted on without fundamental questions having been resolved. What is the "natural death" that the law claims to regulate? Who defines "unbearable" suffering? These uncertainties will be settled by implementation decrees, far from immediate democratic oversight. The most serious blind spot remains the silence on the gradual shift: all countries that have legalized euthanasia have expanded, within a few years, the initially set access criteria.
"Your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit" (1 Cor 6:19). The Christian response is not discouragement but concrete commitment: supporting Catholic healthcare facilities, strengthening palliative care units, and tirelessly reminding that dignified death does not require programmed death.
Create a free account to access all our content and the weekly review.
Sign in to join the discussion.
Voir un proche souffrir sans issue, ça remue. Mais donner la mort comme réponse, est-ce vraiment ça, la compassion ?
Un vote, et tout bascule. J’ai du mal à avaler qu’on efface des siècles de soin comme si c’était une vieille loi obsolète.
Et après le vote, qui va vraiment accompagner ceux qui ont juste peur de souffrir ou de se sentir abandonnés ?
C’est triste de voir ça présenté comme un progrès. Ma mère est partie à l’hôpital, entourée, sans qu’on ait besoin de cette loi. C’était humain, pas une case à cocher.
Aide à mourir : le référendum bloqué, l'Assemblée dans la semaine du vote