I don’t believe one’s age necessarily dictates whether or not you can make an informed decision about whether you want to live or die. A girl like this one who’s been seriously ill for most of her thirteen years is probably more mature and realistic about life than the rest of us who are older, healthier and imagine that we’ll live forever. I remember watching a PBS special decades ago about a woman in her 40s with the diagnosis of terminal cancer who decided to end her life before its quality deteriorated to the extent that she wouldn’t enjoy it. It was basically a home movie of her final days. Before the pain and suffering really got bad, she made her final plans, said goodbye to everyone who meant anything to her, and threw a festive party with her closest friends and relatives, at the end of which she and her husband withdrew to her bedroom, where they said goodbye to each other and he helped her commit suicide. At the time I thought that what she did was very brave and practical, and I still do. I don’t think I could do that. Quality of life is important, but the definition of quality differs among people. The physicist Stephen Hawking has decided to keep living all these years even though he’s paralyzed and can’t talk. Others with medical problems that don’t seem half as serious may choose to end their lives. It’s a very personal decision and none of us can speak for someone else's choice. If a sick young girl would rather spend her last days among friends and family instead of hooked up to machines in the hospital, she should be able to do that. As an animal advocate, I can't help but think about the culture of death we live in, i.e., the millions of animals who are killed routinely every day just to feed humans, to test drugs, even to make fur coats, for god's sake, and I sincerely wish humans would spend as much time thinking about their lives and deaths as we do about ours. Because they suffer, just as we do, and they don't want to die, just as most of us don't. But we don't give them the luxury of making the choice to live or die that we have. That sucks.

It looks like rawnak and I actually agree on something. I would venture to say that your case and hers are quite different. In your case, you were probably in what was a totally unexpected coma in the midst of an otherwise healthy and satisfying life, and your friends, relatives and doctors knew that you would want the chance to come out of it and live; in Hannah’s case, she has, in a fully conscious state, thought about it and decided that she no longer wants to continue to suffer. She has the right to die. There’s no shame in wanting to put an end to a very poor quality of life that won't improve.

that right-wing logic is an oxymoron (black is white, good is bad, up is down). Should be used to Rovian politics after almost eight years! Mea culpa. ;)

that you're contradicting yourself! (i.e., parents have legal obligation to decide whether she lives or dies, but the law should play no role in family decisions)?!! No wonder the Republicans lost so badly on November 4th, even with all the cheating going on. You guys don't know what you believe.