The Court of Cassation rejected this Thursday, December 8 the appeal of the parents of Vincent Lambert against the guardianship granted to his wife Rachel, in favor of stopping care on her husband.
Last July, the Court of Appeal of Reims (Marne) had confirmed that the supervision of Vincent Lambert, plunged into a vegetative state for 8 years, should be entrusted to his wife, for the next ten years. For more than three years, Rachel and the parents of this patient have been tearing apart his survival in court. But a court ruling on Thursday may mark the end of this family tragedy.
The Court of Cassation, the highest court of the judicial order, rejected this Thursday, December 8, the appeal of the parents of Vincent Lambert against the guardianship granted to his wife Rachel, in favor of stopping care. She will therefore remain her guardian. His parents, on the other hand, were fighting to keep their son alive, whom they believed to be conscious.
Living up to her duties as a wife
The Court of Cassation considered that “contrary to the allegations of the Lambert consorts, [Rachel Lambert] fulfilled her duties as a wife, fought alongside her husband and did not fail in her mission of representation “and that she could not be blamed for having moved away from her husband” since ‘there was significant media pressure from which she wished to protect her child ”.
As a reminder, it was the University Hospital of Reims which had requested the appointment of a supervisory authority to legally represent Vincent Lambert. Quickly, on March 10, Rachel Lambert had obtained it, but it was immediately contested by the patient’s parents. Without success. After having exhausted all possibilities before the European courts, parents no longer have any recourse to challenge this decision.
The different options of the Reims University Hospital
As a result, the hospital now has several options. Start the collegial procedure immediately with Dr Daniela Simon or restart it, but with another practitioner. On this subject, the Administrative Court of Appeal of Nancy (Meurthe-et-Moselle) recently recalled that the decision to stop treatment “only binds the doctor who took it”. “The new doctor in charge of Mr. Vincent Lambert is not bound by the decision of his predecessor,” she ruled.
Finally, whoever the doctor is, he will not be able to hide behind the deleterious atmosphere around the establishment. The Court of Nancy had also considered that these “possible threats” do not represent a sufficient legal means to justify an indefinite stopping of the proceedings. Waiting for the climate to be calmer was not a valid argument either, in the eyes of the judges. In the end, the decision to resume collegial proceedings is therefore left to the discretion of Vincent Lambert’s medical team.
.
