Vincent Lambert : the doctors will resume the shutdown procedure care
Published the 19.07.2017 to 17h55
Vincent Lambertsoins palliatifsConseil of Etatfin of life
The doctors of Vincent Lambert are going to have to go through the process collegial. The Council of State deemed it “illegal to suspend the 2nd examination procedure of the interruption of the treatments,” this man 41 years of age hospitalized at the university hospital of Reims since 2008 in a vegetative state.
This interruption had been decided by Dr. Daniela Simon in July 2015. She had said that the medical team was under pressure too important to the family. Relatives of Vincent Lambert tear in the courts for 10 years. While his wife, designated as a tutor, his nephew and some of the brothers and sisters of Vincent Lambert are in favour of a cessation of care, her parents and other members of his family opposed to it.
What are these two parties who have referred the matter to the highest court in French. The nephew of Vincent Lambert has asked the State Council to implement the decision of the Court of appeal of Nancy. It was ordered in June 2016 at the university hospital of Reims to give the doctor the means to continue the process of consultation ” that could lead to a shutdown of the nutrition and hydration that keep alive Vincent Lambert. A disputed decision by the parents.
However, the Sages of the Palais-Royal come to give reason to the Court of appeal of Nancy. They believe that Dr. Simon, who has left his post in January 2017, could not invoke the lack of peace and security, ” to take the decision to suspend the proceedings for an indefinite period “.
“The result is that the doctor currently in charge of Mr. Vincent Lambert will need to decide on the commitment of a procedure for the review of the judgment of the treatment of the person concerned “, explains the Council of State.
If the outcome of these discussions between experts cannot be expected, the State Council recalled that it had considered in June 2014 “, Mr. Vincent Lambert had clearly and repeatedly expressed the wish not to be kept artificially alive in the event where he would be in a state of great dependency.” If the doctors consider that his life-sustaining can be described as an unreasonable obstinacy, the judgment of care may be decided in accordance with the law Leonetti.