97

Putting an end to seven years of contradictory procedures, the decree of November 17, 2000, from the Supreme court of appeal (the ‘Perruche decree’) opened up a public polemic which was only ended by voting in the “anti-Perruche” law in January 2002. In the name of the same principles of equal dignity for persons and respect for handicapped people, the highest jurisdiction in the legal system and the national representation arrived at fully contradictory results. To understand such paradox it is above all necessary to recall the facts which are too often obscured by commentaries and criticisms. The two essential questions of the debate are then developed: does the handicap of Nicolas Perruche constitute a prejudice entitled to compensation? Does the decision of the court prejudice the dignity of handicapped people? Finally, it is argued that the Perruche decree was rejected because it remained incomprehensible to public opinion; and that it appeared to support both the refusal of any solidarity with handicapped people, and some “eugenic” treatment for the problem of handicapped persons. In conclusion it is suggested that the law did not clear up a situation marked by a notorious lack of national solidarity in this field, and it was precisely this lack which brought the parents of Nicolas Perruche before the courts.