Some people maintain that the withdrawal of hydration and nutrition from Terri Schiavo ( March 30, 2005) was not immoral. Do they have any solid reason for affirming this?
Those who dare deny the necessity of hydration and nutrition in those persons considered to be in a vegetative condition have done so on the basis of one of two reasons. The first excuse is the subjective one of “quality of life,” which is all important for the humanist way of thinking. A persons life is to be considered as lacking in quality, unproductive, and not worth living because of brain damage or mental retardation. It is no secret to anyone that such a materialistic, pragmatic conception is directly opposed to the sovereign right that God alone has over life and death, and consequently to the fifth commandment. The second reason that is given is that artificial nutrition and hydration can be considered in certain circumstances (e.g., incurable vegetative state) as extraordinary means, on account of the cost and effort required, and consequently disproportionate to the benefit that can reasonably be expected the prolongation of life and that consequently they would not be oblig
