Critics of the newly adopted assisted dying law express deep concern regarding the potential for societal and ethical erosion. Opponents, including various religious and medical groups, argue that legalizing the intentional ending of life fundamentally alters the role of the physician, shifting the medical profession from a mission of healing to one that includes facilitating death. There is a significant fear that this legislation could create a 'slippery slope,' where the criteria for assisted dying might eventually be expanded to include those who are not terminally ill or who may feel pressured to choose death due to financial or emotional burdens on their families.
Furthermore, skeptics highlight that the focus should remain entirely on improving access to high-quality palliative care rather than introducing lethal options. They argue that if the state truly wants to support the dying, it should invest more heavily in pain management and psychological support to ensure that no patient feels that death is their only escape from suffering. By institutionalizing assisted dying, critics worry that society may inadvertently stigmatize the elderly and the disabled, suggesting that their lives are less worthy of protection. For these opponents, the law represents a dangerous departure from the core values of care and protection that have historically defined the French medical and social system.