On June 8, 2026, the MOCKMUN debates took place at the Lycée de Saint‑Genis. Within the committee addressing euthanasia, a spirit of mutual support prevailed among the delegates, particularly during the origami rose‑making activity, which proved challenging for some… However, during the debates, the committee turned into a true battlefield. Two opposing camps emerged: the countries in favor of euthanasia, and those firmly opposed to it. Euthanasia can be active, meaning it directly causes death, but it can also be passive, allowing a person to die by indirectly causing their death through the withdrawal of life‑sustaining treatment.
End-of-life care: the main countries advocating for it
Many countries accept euthanasia and seek to promote this principle so that every individual, regardless of their background, may have the right to die. Our neighboring country, Switzerland, for example, allows citizens of other countries to come and undergo the procedure there, but it is clear that the Netherlands remain the leader and pioneer in this field.
Indeed, this delegation was heavily involved throughout the morning in defending its pro‑euthanasia stance. Other countries hold a more nuanced view; some prohibit active euthanasia but permit passive euthanasia, such as India. Indeed, the government of that country supports passive euthanasia because it is less shocking and brutal than active euthanasia. However, the situation remains complicated because the first authorization for the use of euthanasia was granted last March with great difficulty. The patient had been in a vegetative state for several years, and after lengthy deliberations, the Supreme Court agreed to grant him the right to passive euthanasia. This was a landmark moment in India’s history, as it was the first time euthanasia had been approved despite a long and complicated legal process. This reflects a shift in public opinion regarding this sensitive issue.
Opposition to euthanasia: the divide in arguments
However, some countries oppose the use and spread of euthanasia within their borders for a variety of reasons, which may be both religious and cultural. Mexico and Morocco, for example, have populations that are predominantly Catholic or Muslim. The idea of decreeing a person’s death in place of God is unimaginable to them. Other nations, such as Spain, New Zealand, and Poland, have aligned themselves with the view that the use of euthanasia is neither just nor ethical. For the governments of these countries, the act of intentionally killing a person is unthinkable because it violates the patient’s dignity, which is protected by various laws.
It is because of these widely divergent opinions that the morning ended with a resolution that failed to pass…
This clearly demonstrates just how sensitive and controversial the topic of euthanasia is. One might wonder if we will ever be able to overcome our differences in order to find, together, the best way to help those who are suffering. Let us not forget: we are fighting to defend those who cannot defend themselves.
Chloé ARNAUD, Adriano PORRU, Zoe PISTILLO