Same with descriptions of people who are "brain dead". "Well they don't have a quality life". So a baby has brain activity and a beating heart and other functioning organs yet is not "alive".
All people on artificial life support systems aren't really alive either. They are not viable (for the time being).
Crazy thought, isn't it?
Life with support, even dependence on that support, does not negate the existence of life. If it does, where shall we draw the line?
Are you really alive if you require anti-rejection medication to keep your heart transplant from failing? Are you really alive if you are on kidney dialysis, without which you would die? Is a paratrooper really alive when his life is dependent upon the nylon cords holding him to his chute?
There are enough anecdotal experiences from coma survivors about being far more aware than others ever dreamed, that one should be extremely careful about declaring a person to be "not really alive".