ROME. The debate on the end of life is underway in Rome in a semi-deserted classroom. “Starting from the legislative texts presented by various political forces, and also by popular initiative, we considered it appropriate to focus on the perimeter marked by the principles sanctioned by the Constitutional Court, believing that that was the most suitable and effective path to try to reach the goal”, he debut Alfredo Bazoli, dem group leader in the Justice Committee in the Chamber and rapporteur of the bill on the End of Life. “A narrow path, not an easy one, which we immediately declared open to confrontation, enrichment, mediation between parliamentary groups”, he acknowledges. The starting point are some basic principles “which we can find in agreement to a large extent, beyond the often artificial contrasts, between the laity and Catholics between right and left – says Bazoli -. The first and most important is that our democracy, our society, our civil community is founded on the right to life, as the first of the inviolable rights of man ”.
The 5-star Movement hopes that there will be “an open, concrete discussion without ideological prejudices about the end of life in the classroom,” says Giuseppe Conte at the end of the meeting with Prime Minister Draghi on the maneuver. The commission “approved a text that seems balanced to me: when there is an irreversible pathological perspective, I believe that the principle of self-determination must prevail”. Having said that, “the state must guarantee palliative care to everyone and in all territories”.
“We will vote against the law on assisted suicide because this text would introduce” favor mortis “instead of” favor vitae “in our system for the first time, which is the spirit that animates the Constitution and international treaties”, immediately announces Maurizio Lupi, president of Us with Italy. «Even those who have no hope of recovery can and must be treated, as the doctors involved in palliative care testify to us, a process that takes care of the sick person and their family members also from a psychological point of view. Although some of the improvements we proposed have been accepted, this text contains too broad requirements, in practice all cases of chronic diseases or disabilities without immediate or medium-term risk of life ».
This is the moment of choices, according to the deputy of LeU, Nico Stumpo: «You can no longer leave the decision to the ethics committees of the ASL through a final provision of a judge if you can or cannot. It must be the state to sanction this decision, with a law. The time to take this responsibility is now. These issues must be addressed with an eye to others, not as a question that concerns the alignments, but as a theme that concerns people in flesh and blood, their rights, suffering “. According to Stumpo, «the merit must be addressed, not what happens in other European states. The end of life is not euthanasia. The state must not leave citizens alone, especially in times of difficulty. What we are discussing is a good text that everyone participated in would be a mistake. If this law ran aground in bicameralism or worse it was ditched by secret votes. This law must have the speed it deserves ».
Vladimir Luxuria hopes «that the law on the end of life will not end up in the same way as the Zan law. Unfortunately in Italy the laws concerning personal freedoms and physical and moral safety always have a difficult path. For a long time, Parliament has been asked to do its duty, that is, to legislate and not to turn its head away in the face of cases of great suffering. A suffering that affects both the person physically involved and those around him. Let’s hope this is really the right time ».