• In July, the Senate will debate a bill that falls far short of allowing terminally ill patients to access assisted suicide: the final say would rest with an Ethics Committee appointed by the government.
• The text also states that "the Republic guarantees the protection of the person, from conception to natural death" — which many see as an attack on the right to abortion.
• The Associazione Luca Coscioni is launching a petition drive for a citizens' initiative bill to legalise euthanasia.

One giant leap for Parliament, one step backward for humanity. Long awaited, a political consensus on a bill regulating so-called end of life — that is, the possibility for a terminally ill patient to voluntarily put an end to their own suffering with the support of a medical facility — finally seems to be taking shape. Unfortunately, this end-of-life bill, the product of an agreement among the parties of the conservative and Catholic majority, is anything but bold or innovative, and appears to fall far short of the possibilities offered, for example, by the regional law passed by Tuscany, the only one currently in force. But that is the least of it, because many see it as an attempt to undermine the right to abortion as well.

End of life: the final word goes to an Ethics Committee

The centrepiece of the proposal is the introduction of a National Ethical Evaluation Committee, tasked with examining patients' requests and deciding on a case-by-case basis who may or may not access this option. In other words: if this law were to come into force, the citizen's right to choose to die would not be guaranteed in any way.

UAAR @UAAR_it

𝕏

Il cardinale Parolin e il ministro degli Esteri Tajani si incontrano: continua l'ingerenza del #Vaticano sul #finevita per limitare l'autodeterminazione e dare risalto alle cure palliative nella proposta di legge che sta elaborando il governo Meloni. 👇
ilgiornale.it/news/politica/…

♥ 47💬 3 18 giu 2025 · Apri su X →

According to the draft, the Committee will be composed of seven members: a legal expert, a bioethicist, an anaesthesiologist-intensivist, a palliative care physician, a psychiatrist, a psychologist, and a nurse. And the appointments could fall directly to the President of the Council of Ministers, who would also designate the body's president, vice-president, and secretary. Members would serve five-year terms, renewable for a maximum of three mandates.

The Committee would have 60 days to assess each request (Tuscany's law allows 20) with the possibility of extension to 120 days in particularly complex cases — for instance, rare diseases or exceptional clinical conditions. The aim is to introduce uniform criteria at a national level, replacing the current patchwork situation in which each region interprets the Constitutional Court's rulings independently. The major shortcomings, however, stem from the fact that decisions over a person's suffering could effectively be made by a body appointed directly by the government rather than by the National Health Service, and that a waiting period of up to four months seems genuinely excessive.

Più Europa ✓ @Piu_Europa

𝕏

Sì, hai capito bene.
Nella proposta di legge sul Fine Vita il Governo ha inserito un principio anti-aborto.

È questa la concezione che hanno dei tuoi diritti: vogliono decidere loro come devi nascere, come devi vivere e come devi morire, soffocando ogni tua libertà di scelta.

♥ 27💬 3 25 giu 2025 · Apri su X →

To access assisted dying, the patient must be an adult, suffering from an irreversible and terminal condition, and experiencing physical or psychological suffering deemed unbearable. The person must also be dependent on life-sustaining treatments and capable of making informed decisions. So far, broadly in line with what the Constitutional Court has established. Additionally, however, the patient must first have undergone a course of mandatory palliative care. This very requirement is one of the most controversial points: the text stipulates that no one may submit a request without first having gone through the palliative care system, which the government intends to expand until it covers 90 per cent of the population by 2028. If a patient's application is deemed inadmissible, it cannot be resubmitted for the following four years. A provision that, according to critics, risks adding further suffering to those already in extreme conditions.

But the other point that has set alarm bells ringing for many is what appears in the very preamble of the draft: namely, that "the Republic guarantees the protection of the person, from conception to natural death".

The citizens' counter-proposal

Marco Cappato @marcocappato

𝕏

#EutanasiaLegale: l'obiettivo è raccogliere le firme di 50.000 persone in due settimane, in modo da depositare la nostra proposta di legge in Parlamento.
Firmare è semplicissimo: bastano 2 minuti con SPID o carta d'identità elettronica.
firmereferendum.giustizia.it/referendum/ope…

♥ 583💬 57 26 giu 2025 · Apri su X →

This end-of-life bill is expected to reach the Senate floor on 17 July. In the meantime, the Associazione Luca Coscioni — long the most active organisation on this issue — has launched a petition drive for a citizens' initiative bill aimed at legalising all end-of-life choices, including euthanasia.

This bill provides for:

• the freedom to choose between self-administration or administration by a doctor;
• the taking charge by the National Health Service, with completion of checks within 30 days of the request;
• the possibility for doctors to participate on a voluntary basis.

"People with irreversible conditions and unbearable suffering have already had the right for seven years to be helped to die without suffering in Italy, thanks to the Constitutional Court's ruling – recalls Marco Cappato, treasurer of the Associazione Luca Coscioni -. Now the Government wants to restrict and cancel this right by eliminating the role of the National Health Service. We, on the other hand, propose extending the right to be assisted also by a doctor and also to people who are not dependent on medical treatments, such as terminally ill cancer patients", who are currently excluded.

The issue is the same, the approach completely different: we shall see whether the popular vision or that of the corridors of power will prevail.