Current Events: When Is Life Not Life?

Michael Schavio's having trouble with the in-laws. His wife suffered brain damage from an eating disorder about fifteen years ago, and she's been on various life supports and basically a vegetable ever since (although opposing sides debate on the extent of her vegetable-ness). Anyway, there's a huge court battle that's been raging for about seven years between Michael and his wife's parents. Michael wants to pull the plug and let her die, claiming that his wife said she'd rather die than live in a vegetable state for years and years. The in-laws don't want her to die, claiming she's still alive and functional.

I don't care too much about the logistics of the court battle - it's all complicated back-and-forth mush anyway. What's more interesting is the greater question this case provokes: What is life, and when is it not life?

If someone has suffered severe brain damage, and they're going to be a hooked-up vegetable for the rest of their life... well, what do you do? Practically, it makes more sense to just pull the plug. They'll never be able to do anything, and by keeping them alive, probably in pain, for several years, you're just wasting lots and lots of money, and the result would be the same whether they die now or a few years down the road. Why waste the money to accomplish nothing?

But it's not that easy. It just doesn't feel right to play God. If you pull the plug on someone's life, you're basically saying that they're worthless. Can we do that? And the problem with that line of thinking is that if you start to expound on it, you have all these arguments for euthanasia and abortion---let's just kill old people when they get too old, let's abort retarded kids, and all this stuff, because at this point they're just taking up space on the earth and they won't do anything. That's obviously not right!

But at the same time... does it make sense to spend thousands and thousands of dollars for several years to keep a relative breathing if they're barely cognizant, will be on life support for the rest of their life, and will never be able to do anything until they die? What is all that time, effort, and money going to accomplish in that situation? Nothing. Whether the person dies now, or in fifteen years, their situation won't change a bit. Is it worth it to keep them "alive"?

I don't think it is. But it's not that easy. When is life not worth sustaining? When is life not life? It's a hard question. And I don't know the answer.

Edmond the Hun