A life worth living

I’ve seen a very distressing photo of a baby without limbs on facebook recently . I was invited to “like it”, which I didn’t. I simply “didn’t like it” but there was no such button.

Neither did I like some of the comments under the photo. Two of them were in Dutch. One said:

“This has no life expectancy!!! So miserable if it stays alive”

Another one translated as “That’s very egoistic of the parents, to allow it to get born. “

The comments in English were much more compassionate, in general.

All that brought so many questions, that I'll just continue the rest of this post multiplying the question marks.

What makes those two Dutch persons so sure a life without hands or legs is not worth living? Is it just a coincidence that they are Dutch, or does that have something to do with the Dutch attitude to euthanasia? Why is the baby called “it” in this context? Do only limbs give a human being the right to be called a he or a she, and lack of those – deny that right? What happens if one has them all, but they are all paralyzed? Nobody would dare call a person suffering from ALS not a person, but an “it”, a thing. Is the life of Stephen Hawkings not worth living?

Do these arms or legs have to be functioning, or is their sheer presence sufficient to be recognized as a “he” or “she”? And what happens if someone has lost all their limbs – does “that” qualify for a human being, or not?

Why would that be egoistic of the parents to bring to life a child a care for whom will cost them considerably more effort than for a healthy one?

When can one human being decide about the right to live of another one? Or of oneself?

I have a hunch why the two comments in Dutch were so cold, so inhumane: that is probably because the key to life in Holland is “genieten” – enjoy. If one stops or is stopped from enjoying life, the latter may just as well be ended. In case of a baby, who cannot communicate the level of his/her enjoyment of life, it is up to the parents to decide whether “its” life is worth living.

Before “it” is born, that’s the enjoyment of the life of the parent(s) that supersedes that of the enjoyment of the life of the child. If the parents will enjoy their life substantially less after “it” is born, it’s ok to end “its” life. I think parents of a severely handicapped child will not enjoy their life after the child is born, so the decision to deliver such a baby can be judged as anything but egoistic.
With enjoyment, you never know – to judge your level of enjoyment you need a point of reference, for example – the moment in your life when you enjoyed it the most.

In case of a handicapped child the point of reference is very different than in case of a grown-up healthy adult.

The Dutch, who claim to have created the Netherlands, assume the right to decide when a life is worth living and when it’s not. Not only do they decide it for themselves, but also for others.

But I think all life is worth living. We might just not understand the reasons why.

Just read this: “When Michelangelo was commissioned to sculpt a puppet clown, it was just enough to touch the wood several times with his knife, and the clown was ready. But when he was requested to sculpt a human being, he had to labour painstakingly long in stone. I want you to be human, and this hurts” (an interview with Ewa Minge in “Wysokie Obcasy Ekstra” Nov12 edition)