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

Forum Index » Pets

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

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]New poster again. While I don’t understand why poor ppl get pets (since they make it harder to rent and are generally an expensive thing), I also don’t understand how pet care became so expensive. Cancer treatment? Overnight hospital stays? We aren’t talking about people. Our ancestors would shoot a sick dog to end its pain - and would get a new one. They loved their dogs but they very well knew they weren’t people. [/quote]

Many other cultures treat pets similarly. They're not people. Wackadoodle people will start arguments about this, using humans as examples. They should be ignored completely because domesticated animals kept as pets are simply not the same as humans, nor should they be prioritized similarly. Human needs come first, so if you can't pay your bills because of the pet, it's time for the pet to go. For an older pet with QOL issues that are expected to increase, a humane death with the family it knows and loves is an acceptable option, and preferable to rehoming (in most cases) as there simply aren't enough homes looking for older pets with QOL issues.

USian pet culture has gone totally mad, and there's a whole industry built to profit off it. People need to think, and this thread clearly shows how little of that is going on these days. Y'all scare me![/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics