Would you ever euthanize a pet that had medical issues that were not terminal

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, you don’t murder your pet because they need medication and occasional vet visits as they age.

+9000 there are some ruthless people on this thread.

Some people just have a different view on non-humans. A friend of mine had a rule that $1k was the max he would spend on a vet issue for his dog. Anything more, the dog would have to live with the issue or they would put it down. It was probably a good negotiating strategy with the vet at times but I think he was serious about it. I’m a bigger sucker for my pets but I don’t think his position is unethical.

[Anonymous]

A lot of people don’t have a good understanding of animals. I have spent a lot of money on pets (just spent $3k on an old cat) but I know what the outcomes were like and I can afford it. I would not judge someone for putting down that cat. I have also euthanized a horse for aggression issues (you think a dangerous dog is bad? Imagine if your cute horse tried to kill people!) and I know several people who judge me for that. They have Black Stallion Syndrome and think they are the special ones who could have saved her. Well, if she killed them I’d have to live with it and I was not ready to take that risk. I’d seen her in action.

Animals are complicated and OP, if you really feel it is best for your situation, go for it. I judge a lot harder people who keep them alive too long selfishly. Animals live in the now and their suffering is something we can control to some extent.

[Anonymous]

Good luck finding a vet who will euthanize a sickly and aging but not yet terminal pet. Our 19-year-old cat stopped eating and drinking and started having trouble walking, so we took him to the vet to be put to sleep. They wanted to do $1000+ of tests, so we brought him home. He resumed eating and drinking (not much) and is still hobbling around and sleeping all the time. I guess the idea is that he has to suffer more before he can be put down, because that is humane?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Good luck finding a vet who will euthanize a sickly and aging but not yet terminal pet. Our 19-year-old cat stopped eating and drinking and started having trouble walking, so we took him to the vet to be put to sleep. They wanted to do $1000+ of tests, so we brought him home. He resumed eating and drinking (not much) and is still hobbling around and sleeping all the time. I guess the idea is that he has to suffer more before he can be put down, because that is humane?

Find an independent vet. The one you went to was almost certainly owned by a private equity firm. You saw firsthand that their commitment is to profit, not to you or to your pet's quality of life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A lot of people don’t have a good understanding of animals. I have spent a lot of money on pets (just spent $3k on an old cat) but I know what the outcomes were like and I can afford it. I would not judge someone for putting down that cat. I have also euthanized a horse for aggression issues (you think a dangerous dog is bad? Imagine if your cute horse tried to kill people!) and I know several people who judge me for that. They have Black Stallion Syndrome and think they are the special ones who could have saved her. Well, if she killed them I’d have to live with it and I was not ready to take that risk. I’d seen her in action.

Animals are complicated and OP, if you really feel it is best for your situation, go for it. I judge a lot harder people who keep them alive too long selfishly. Animals live in the now and their suffering is something we can control to some extent.

This is exactly right. People don't understand animal psychology, and anthropomorphize their pets to a seriously deranged degree. Particularly disgusting is breeders who try to capitalize on this by pursuing appearance over QoL-- did you know that pugs are deliberately bred with those round flat faces to resemble human babies?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Good luck finding a vet who will euthanize a sickly and aging but not yet terminal pet. Our 19-year-old cat stopped eating and drinking and started having trouble walking, so we took him to the vet to be put to sleep. They wanted to do $1000+ of tests, so we brought him home. He resumed eating and drinking (not much) and is still hobbling around and sleeping all the time. I guess the idea is that he has to suffer more before he can be put down, because that is humane?

I'm so sorry PP. I bet Lap of Love would help you. https://www.lapoflove.com

[Anonymous]

If you don't want to put the dog down, but can't afford the care...you could try reaching out to rescue to see if they might be able to help. Some rescues help pay to keep dogs with loving owners and others may be able to find a family who could adopt the dog.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Only if you would do the same for parents or your children or spouse. You'd do that, right?

What a ridiculous response. Off the wall.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, I think I would. It is hard to really say what one would do without being in the position you describe in the current moment.

I think that OP's question is as much about a person's pet as it is about their personal relationship with money. And the money piece is always so complicated and varied from person-to-person. I have dogs and I SPOIL them to no end. They are part of our family and on some days, the absolute best part.

But as they age I find it extremely stressful to see their veterinary care increase with every year. I worry about what is to come as one of our dogs is about to turn 12 and is having more critical and expensive issues. We will absolutely do everything we can to give her a joyful and comfortable old aged life but will we spend thousands of dollars to prolong it? I am not so sure. One of my friends just spent over $6k to treat their dog and just the thought of that kind of money causes me great anxiety. I am one who worries about money so does that mean I should not have a dog? Maybe. But then there are so many dogs that need good homes ... it is all so personal and complicated.

Yep, we just did this for our 11 year old dog in the past year. At the time we were dealing with an acute emergency, then one night in the animal hospital turned into another... She is now stable and happy, though much slower than before the emergency, and her ongoing medical management only costs around $100/month. We are DCUM poors, but actually middle class, and can keep up her care until it gets significantly more expensive ($300-400/month for the first few months was really hurting) or she starts to fail.

And seconding the private vet suggestion. Ours works with us as much as possible to minimize the expense and has been preparing us that we'll need to make the decision when it gets to the point that she's suffering. Which will happen eventually, be it in two months or two years from now.

[Anonymous]

What’s a private vet??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Only if you would do the same for parents or your children or spouse. You'd do that, right?

Oh god you're one of those. Please mention this pets = people delusion early and often, so that we may mock and then avoid you!

Oh God, you're one of THOSE. People who shouldn't have pets. And a horrible human being to boot.

Tell me: Were you born wrong or is your lack of compassion learned behavior? Were your parents uncaring, sorry sacks of shit, too?

I can't believe how beautifully this response captures the essence of Those People. Thank you. It's perfect.

[Anonymous]

Pets can’t communicate that they are in pain. They don’t understand they are going to the vet for a procedure that helps them. They are just scared and in pain. They in fact instinctively hide their pain as in the animal world it would attract predators.

I guarantee you that if you asked this question to 20 retired veterinarians who worked before the private equity scourge in veterinary care, they would ALL say it’s better to euthanize the pet.

[Anonymous]

OP, look into pet insurance, different vets, and other ways to foot the bil for reasonable care that gives your pet good quality of life. It is reasonable to see a vet 2-4 times a year, give painkillers for arthritis, etc.

Care that prolongs life without good quality is cruel, and so is giving up an elderly sick pet who has spent its whole life with your family. I would euthanize in both situations. I would not put a dog through something like cancer treatment either.

But if you decide to euthanize because you cannot afford routine care ... don't you dare get another dog and start down this path again. Emergencies and illnesses are part of the cost of pet ownership.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What’s a private vet??

I assume they mean a veterinary office that isn’t owned by a private equity firm, so medical care is focused on your pet’s wellbeing first and foremost instead of on maximizing profit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What’s a private vet??

I assume they mean a veterinary office that isn’t owned by a private equity firm, so medical care is focused on your pet’s wellbeing first and foremost instead of on maximizing profit.

I’m not sure many of those exist anymore