It is a right to which doctors are very attached: that of refusing, in the name of the conscience clause, to practice a treatment that would be contrary to their convictions, without needing to justify themselves or risk of sanction. Introduced by the Veil law of January 17, 1975 and included in the health code, the specific clause on voluntary termination of pregnancy (IVG) states that“no midwife, nurse or medical assistant whatsoever is required to assist in the termination of pregnancy”. Provided, however, that such practitioner informs ” without delay ” the patient of his refusal and above all, that he directs her ” immediately “ to other professionals likely to respond to their request.
This fragile balance between the freedom of women, that of the medical profession and the « respect of every human being from the beginning of life » (article 1 of the law of 1975 and article
16 of the Penal Code) will it be called into question by the bill announced by President Emmanuel Macron on Wednesday March 8, during his tribute to lawyer Gisèle Halimi? By choosing, in the wake of the Senate, to talk about a ” freedom of women resorting to voluntary termination of pregnancy. rather than a ” right “the Head of State is more in line with the compromise logic of the Veil law.
In the state in which
“This wording allows women and doctors to escape two constraints: that of an unwanted pregnancy for the first, and that of carrying out an abortion for the second”, analyzes Bertrand Mathieu, constitutional expert and professor at the Sorbonne Law School of the University of Paris 1. According to him, the conscience clause, often perceived as an obstacle to abortion for women, was one of the main targets of supporters of the registration of a “right” to abortion. Less offensive, the term freedom therefore allows a form of status quo. “It will not change anything in law, we are first in the ideological debate”he insists.
« The fact of attributing a freedom and not a right to abortion in the Constitution avoids reinforcing the contradictory injunctions which are made to the doctor: on the one hand, to ensure a duty of service as a doctor; on the other, to exercise their freedom of conscience as a human,” welcomes for his part the doctor Bertrand de Rochambeau, president of the Union of gynecologists and obstetricians of France and ardent defender of the conscience clause in abortion.
Lack of means
A symbol is also how Professor Philippe Deruelle perceives Emmanuel Macron’s constitutional bill. “For us doctors, this will not change anything: women will not have more or less access to abortion, and doctors who invoke the conscience clause will still be able to do so”, considers the head of the obstetrics gynecology center at the Strasbourg University Hospital. According to this former secretary of the National College of French Gynecologists and Obstetricians, the concern of the profession is less about this clause than about the need to protect women from political reversals. “Whether we are talking about rights or freedom, constitutionalization means that if tomorrow a government opposed to abortion suddenly decides to restrict access to it, we will not find ourselves in the American situation”he wants to believe.
Whatever their convictions, doctors now plead for the symbolic to give way to the concrete. “Contrary to what we often hear, the main obstacle to abortion is not our conscience clause, but the lack of means, assures Doctor Bertrand de Rochambeau. Establishing freedom for women is a good thing, but for the constraints weighing on them to be lifted, they must be helped.. »
“We have focused the debate on abortion, but beyond the freedom to abort, it is the freedom of women to dispose of their bodies which should be enshrined in the Constitution, says Professor Philippe Deruelle. It’s a little weird to have to write such an obvious fact, but the field shows that it’s more than necessary. »
—–
months of debate
June 24, 2022. The United States Supreme Court overturns the Roe vs. Wade decision, burying the right to abortion at the federal level for American women. Each state is now free to define its policy on abortion.
In the following weeks, six bills are tabled in France to include the right to abortion in the Constitution, including that of the deputy Mathilde Panot (La France insoumise), adopted at the assembly on November 24.
February 1st. The Senate reformulates the proposal by replacing the ” right “ over there “freedom to terminate pregnancy”.