French lawmakers approve assisted dying bill, paving the way for approval
PARIS, May 27 (Reuters) - French lower house lawmakers approved a bill on Tuesday to legalise assisted dying, paving the way for France to become the latest European nation to allow terminally ill people to end their lives.
The final passage of the bill remains some way off, with the text now heading to the Senate. However, the legislation is expected to pass, with polls showing more than 90% of French people in favour of laws that give people with terminal diseases or interminable suffering the right to die.
French President Emmanuel Macron called the vote in the National Assembly "an important step."
The bill, which was approved in parliament by 305 votes to 199, provides the right to assisted dying to any French person over the age of 18 suffering from a serious or incurable condition that is life-threatening, advanced or terminal.
The person, who must freely make their decision, must also have constant physical or psychological suffering that cannot be alleviated. Lawmakers stipulated that psychological suffering alone would not be enough to end one's life.
The patient can administer the lethal dose themselves or by an accredited medical professional if they are physically unable. Healthcare workers who object to doing so are free to opt out. Anyone found to have obstructed someone's right to die can face a two-year prison sentence and a 30,000 euro fine.
Laws to enable assisted dying are gathering steam across Europe. In November, British lawmakers voted in favour of allowing assisted dying, paving the way for Britain to follow countries such as Australia, Canada and some U.S. states in what would be the biggest social reform in a generation.
In March, the Isle of Man, a self-governing British Crown Dependency off northwest England, approved an assisted dying bill, potentially making the island the first place in the British Isles where terminally ill people could end their lives.
"France is one of the last countries in Western Europe to legislate on this issue," leftist lawmaker Olivier Falorni told Reuters. "We are in a global process ... France is behind, and I hope we will do it with our own model."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sky News
11 minutes ago
- Sky News
'No doubt' UK will spend 3% of GDP on defence in next parliament, defence secretary says
There is "no doubt" the UK "will spend 3% of our GDP on defence" in the next parliament, the defence secretary has said. John Healey's comments come ahead of the publication of the government's Strategic Defence Review (SDR) on Monday. This is an assessment of the state of the armed forces, the threats facing the UK, and the military transformation required to meet them. Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has previously set out a "clear ambition" to raise defence spending to 3% in the next parliament "subject to economic and fiscal conditions". Mr Healey has now told The Times newspaper there is a "certain decade of rising defence spending" to come, adding that this commitment "allows us to plan for the long term. It allows us to deal with the pressures." A government source insisted the defence secretary was "expressing an opinion, which is that he has full confidence that the government will be able to deliver on its ambition", rather than making a new commitment. The UK currently spends 2.3% of GDP on defence, with Sir Keir announcing plans to increase that to 2.5% by 2027 in February. This followed mounting pressure from the White House for European nations to do more to take on responsibility for their own security and the defence of Ukraine. The 2.3% to 2.5% increase is being paid for by controversial cuts to the international aid budget, but there are big questions over where the funding for a 3% rise would be found, given the tight state of government finances. While a commitment will help underpin the planning assumptions made in the SDR, there is of course no guarantee a Labour government would still be in power during the next parliament to have to fulfil that pledge. 1:21 A statement from the Ministry of Defence makes it clear that the official government position has not changed in line with the defence secretary's comments. The statement reads: "This government has announced the largest sustained increase to defence spending since the end of the Cold War - 2.5% by 2027 and 3% in the next parliament when fiscal and economic conditions allow, including an extra £5bn this financial year. "The SDR will rightly set the vision for how that uplift will be spent, including new capabilities to put us at the leading edge of innovation in NATO, investment in our people and making defence an engine for growth across the UK - making Britain more secure at home and strong abroad." Sir Keir commissioned the review shortly after taking office in July 2024. It is being led by Lord Robertson, a former Labour defence secretary and NATO secretary general. The Ministry of Defence has already trailed a number of announcements as part of the review, including plans for a new Cyber and Electromagnetic Command and a £1bn battlefield system known as the Digital Targeting Web, which we're told will "better connect armed forces weapons systems and allow battlefield decisions for targeting enemy threats to be made and executed faster". On Saturday, the defence secretary announced a £1.5bn investment to tackle damp, mould and make other improvements to poor quality military housing in a bid to improve recruitment and retention. Mr Healey pledged to "turn round what has been a national scandal for decades", with 8,000 military family homes currently unfit for habitation. He said: "The Strategic Defence Review, in the broad, will recognise that the fact that the world is changing, threats are increasing. "In this new era of threat, we need a new era for defence and so the Strategic Defence Review will be the vision and direction for the way that we've got to strengthen our armed forces to make us more secure at home, stronger abroad, but also learn the lessons from Ukraine as well. "So an armed forces that can be more capable of innovation more quickly, stronger to deter the threats that we face and always with people at the heart of our forces… which is why the housing commitments that we make through this strategic defence review are so important for the future."
Daily Mail
19 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Amanda Holden passionately hits back at Ofcom outrage over her Britain's Got Talent outfits after her daring looks have sparked over 1,000 complaints
Amanda Holden has hit back at Ofcom complaints over her daring outfits on Britain's Got Talent. The Britain's Got Talent judge, 54, often steals the limelight on the long-running ITV show with her very glamorous outfits. She is known for sporting some bold ensembles while taking to the judging panel alongside Simon Cowell, Alesha Dixon and Bruno Tonioli. Her looks have raised eyebrows and have sparked more than 1,000 Ofcom complaints over the years, but Amanda has now firmly brushed off the criticism. Amanda said she works closely with her stylist on creating each look and insisted she loves every single outfit she has worn on the show since its launch in 2007. From A-list scandals and red carpet mishaps to exclusive pictures and viral moments, subscribe to the Daily Mail's showbiz newsletter to stay in the loop. She told Closer magazine: 'What you see on TV, I really love. 'I'm always asked about the Ofcom complaints, but every outfit on the show is checked before I leave my dressing room, so I'm never worried. 'I think people should have fun with fashion!' It is not the first time Amanda has defended her fashion choices on the talent competition after coming under fire from some viewers. In 2022, she said: 'Fashion is about taking risks. I encourage everyone to have a little fun and be a little daring. I'd be bored playing it safe.' She added that her co-star Alesha Dixon, 46, never cops criticism for her racy outfits, describing the level of complaints as 'bizarre'. The TV star's bold fashion choices on Britain's Got Talent are often a talking point among fans of the series, with Amanda repeatedly forced to hit back at criticism. In one very famous moment, a daring Julien Macdonald gown she wore during the semi-final of BGT in 2017 attracted a staggering 663 Ofcom complaints. The plunging floor-length dress plunged down to the navel, with a cut-out panel that reached the small of her back - but it came under fire when furious viewers deemed it 'inappropriate'. Despite the £11,000 ensemble causing hundreds of viewers to complain to Ofcom, the media regulator decided not to investigate. Ofcom said that while it recognised the dress 'had potential to offend some viewers during what is a family show' - the outfit 'would not have exceeded most viewers' expectations'. In 2019, another of Amanda's dresses on the show sparked nine Ofcom complaints. The judge wore for a sheer dress with spiderweb detailing over the chest, but it was branded 'inappropriate' by viewers, with nine viewers complaining about the look. However, Amanda appeared to see the funny side as she took to Instagram to share a joke about a water bottle sitting on the judges panel acting as a 'nipple cover'. The following night, she sparked more Ofcom complaints as she strutted her stuff in a gown by Lebanese designer Saiid Kobeisy. In another controversy, the regulator said the dress received 34 complaints relating to her dress. She has continued to show off her bold looks on the 2025 series of Britain's Got Talent and has provided she won't let the backlash change her style During an October 2020 episode, Amanda once again wowed in a plum Suzanne Neville dress with a lace corset top that showed off her toned legs. Of the 896 reported complaints made to Ofcom about the episode, 136 of these were about her dress, with Amanda sharing her 'baffled' reaction to the outrage. 'Just to say this dress got a tiny 136 complaints out of the 896 we apparently got that night,' she said on Instagram at the time. 'Surely there are more terrible and important things to write you agree? I'm baffled why it's still going on.' In 2020, after wearing a navy Celia Kritharioti off-the-shoulder dress with a V-neckline - more Ofcom complaints were made. Amanda was hit by 235 complaints but firmly hit back at the criticism in another impassioned Instagram post. She has continued to show off her bold fashion-forward looks on the 2025 series of Britain's Got Talent and has provided she won't let the backlash change her style.
Daily Mail
19 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
I tasted the 'world's SOUREST sweet' dubbed Black Death - so acidic it's not suitable for anyone under 12
If you love extreme food challenges, there's a fearsome new confection taking social media by storm. The 'Black Death' sweets are ultra-sour jet black balls created by English confectionery company Mr Simms. Mr Simms describes Black Death as 'the world's sourest sweet', beating the likes of Sour Patch Kids, Toxic Waste and Warheads Sour Cubes. On its website, the little lemon-flavoured boiled spheres are available at £4.50 for 200g, £10.99 for 500g and £21.79 for 1kg. And due to their alleged potency, they're not recommended for anyone under the age of 12. Social media influencer @underratedhijabi has already tried the confectionary, describing it as like 'a metal road at the back of my throat'. In a viral video, she theatrically bursts into a series of convulsions seconds after popping it into her mouth and has to quickly spit it out. Not to be deterred, MailOnline's Assistant Science Editor, Jonathan Chadwick, got hold of a packet – although just one of the balls was more than enough. I love super-sour candy, having grown up guzzling the likes of Jelly Belly Sours, Dweebs, Haribo Tangfastics and Swizzels Refreshers. But I'm a bit nervous about the Black Death, which has already put a 10-year-old girl in hospital after it burnt her throat. Black Death are exclusively available at Mr Simms – the 'Olde Sweet Shoppe' known for its retro-looking wood-panelled physical stores across England. When I get my sample, I notice on the packet it says Black Death sweets are 'not suitable for children under 12 years of age'. 'CAUTION: Excessive consumption within a brief time frame may cause temporary mouth and/or stomach irritation,' it adds. I'm instantly reminded of 77X42, the small lemon sweet from an episode of 'The Simpsons' that is so sour it can only be contained in a magnetic field. Among Black Death's ingredients are sugar, glucose syrup and malic acid – the compound responsible for the tart flavour in fruits and vegetables, such as rhubarb. There's also citric acid, which is generally recognised as safe as a food additive – but is also used as a de-scaler in household cleaning products. The packaging says: 'Warning: Not suitable for children under 12 years of age'. Its aroma is described as 'of sugar, acid and lemon' I'm reminded of 77X42, the small lemon sweet from an episode of 'The Simpsons' that is so sour it can only be contained in a magnetic field Also included is black iron oxide, which sounds pretty ominous but is an approved, commonly-used colourant used in the food industry. It gives the sweets a jet black appearance, like little charcoal lumps (if it weren't for the heavy dusting of chunky acid crystals over them). Unlike the hysterical social media influencer, I'm forbidden from spitting out Black Death once I put it in my mouth (it is a taste test after all!) For the first two seconds, it doesn't really seem that sour at all, but the zingy effect very suddenly registers. The only thing I can compare it to is taking a big bite out of a pink grapefruit, peel and all – not really that pleasant. I get all the physiological symptoms, including wincing and puckered mouth – although not quite to the extent of Homer Simpson. It's easily the sourest sweet I've ever had, but I don't quite get the urge to spit it out. Somehow this goes against the human body's innate rejection response for sour things, which are detected by special receptor cells in taste buds. Thankfully, the ferociously sour taste doesn't last for the entire time that you're sucking the little black ball. After about 20-30 seconds, just as you think you can't take any more, it suddenly shifts from ultra-sour to fruity sweet. It seems that the crusty white exterior crystals are what gives the sweet its astringency – but once you've sucked through them the endurance test is basically over. Finally, once you get to the centre, you get an extra little burst of sourness – although nothing compared with the initial hit. To be honest, having seen the histrionics of @underratedhijabi, I'm a tad disappointed that Black Death sweets aren't a lot more potent. I guess the next step up from Black Death is confectionary containing inedible acids that are so toxic they could seriously harm someone. So unless we enter the fictional realm of Willy Wonka or The Simpsons, Black Death is probably as acidic as we're going to get. However, I wouldn't recommend eating several of these in one go, or leaving them lying around for any unsuspecting child to encounter. According to scientists, excess exposure to acid can burn through the tender skin on the tongue and cheeks – so approach with caution. Sourness is related to the acidity of food, which is often caused by bacterial fermentation and typically evokes a rejection response. Edible acids that are naturally found in fruits and vegetables include malic acid, citric acid and tartaric acid. There's also acetic acid (found in vinegar), oxalic acid (found in tea, cocoa and pepper) and benzoic acid (found in cranberries, prunes and plums. Meanwhile, inedible acids (those that are harmful or unsafe to consume) include hydrochloric acid, sulfuric acid and nitric acid. The sourness of substances is rated relative to dilute hydrochloric acid, which has a sourness index of 1 and is extremely toxic and corrosive. By comparison, tartaric acid has a sourness index of 0.7, citric acid an index of 0.46, and carbonic acid an index of 0.06.
