At the beginning of last May, the party of the current government registered a bill to legalize euthanasia. The absence of discussion would facilitate the approval of a deeply unjust law.

The most alarming thing about this project law is that, according to what has been revealed, it is inspired by the Dutch euthanasia law. Let everyone know: the first Dutch law (1993) was ideal. It was presented with insurmountable limits for truly extraordinary and compassionate cases: serious and irreversible illnesses, unbearable pain, exhaustion of other resources and, of course, the free request of the patient. The reality overflowed the letter of the law and, in step with the abuses by some doctors who passed through the court and were acquitted, it was progressively expanded until it reached the current law: suffering does not have to be physical, it can also be psychic, it does not have to be terminal and it can be applied to minors. According to surveys carried out by the Dutch Public Prosecutor's Office after the first law, contrary to what was established, less than half of the euthanasias performed were reported to the competent authority; 40% of the cases were performed on incapable patients, and 15% on capable patients without their consent. Nothing more to say. The Netherlands has seen euthanasia deaths soar at a rate of up to 10% more each year.

It may be objected that those who promote this project are trying to make a better law. Therein lies the greatest blindness: the problem is the very existence of this law, which gives a person the power to legally end - out of "compassion" - the life of someone fragile and vulnerable. These 40% and 15% of cases hide behind them the thought that it is unreasonable to want to continue living like this. As Dr. Gonzalo Herranz, an expert at subject, has acutely shown, the Dutch government threatened to stiffen penalties for professionals who broke the law, but was basically paralyzed by the frightening finding that a euthanasia law is essentially uncontrollable. You can't put a policeman at every hospital bed. I recently saw a photograph of a woman who, in her old age, had a tattoo on her shoulder: "Don't euthanize me".

Inspired by the Dutch case, in 2015 the House of Commons of England and Wales overturned by a large majority the project assisted suicide bill. Theo Boer, a Dutch expert in Medical Ethics and a determined promoter of euthanasia in his country, wrote a article for the British press acknowledging that "we were wrong, terribly wrong". The law considered euthanasia as something extraordinary, but it has ended up being applied to people who are depressed because they are lonely or widowed. And it warned that "once the genie is out of the bottle, it is unlikely to be put back in."

Inspired by the Netherlands, the English have rejected euthanasia because it contradicts the very values defended by their society. Think about it: what do the people do, what do the firemen do when someone goes out on a balcony with the intention of throwing himself off? Do they cheer that person? What do the media do when faced with cases of suicide? Do they proclaim them to the four winds? Even the style guide of a Spanish newspaper that fervently promotes euthanasia claims special prudence because "these news incite people who were already prone to suicide to take their own lives and who feel at that moment an imitation stimulus". It is a contradiction and hypocrisy to think that suicide is not a social good and at the same time promote the suicide of the most vulnerable. England and Wales have rejected the euthanasia law because the laws not only allow behaviors but also educate by transmitting the signal that it is a social good. And suicide is not. Instead, they have created a Ministry to address the problem of loneliness.

Our rulers and some political parties want to enter the lives of vulnerable people to tell them -with a smile- that suicide may be a good option for them. Sooner or later, who will not feel subtly coerced into thinking that he or she is a burden and that the best thing to do is to commit suicide? Gentlemen rulers and parliamentarians: true compassion is promote that vulnerable people have affection and financial aid -also economic-, and that they are not alone (I remind you that your express divorce law has made the family an institution more fragile than Chinese porcelain). True compassion is to encourage palliative care, not suicide. Don't write off the vulnerable, that is true compassion.