98% of vets asked to euthanise healthy pets for bad behaviour

RE: 98% of vets asked to euthanise healthy pets for bad behaviour

Arlo Guthrie — Wed, 14 Sep 2016 06:44:07 GMT

[mention:00e1029523d548378949a59a244bff6f:e9ed411860ed4f2ba0265705b8793d05] I just meant that in the situation where they have no other diagnosed condition, one might say they were otherwise healthy. But I suppose you're right, you probably wouldn't say that a dog with end stage renal or cardiac failure was 'otherwise healthy'. Interesting point.

RE: 98% of vets asked to euthanise healthy pets for bad behaviour

Aine Seavers — Wed, 14 Sep 2016 04:46:16 GMT

They are not healthy-otherwise or not.

A severe hormone deficient insulin diabetic needing insulin supplementation daily is not ótherwise healthy.

A severe serotonin deficient aggressive, violent or globally fearful dog needing serotonin and other supplementations is not ótherwise healthy.

That view point is hammered home by Veterinary specialists psychologists here in Australia for the last 30years- I am surprised to see the message has not gotten through to BSAVA hierarchy and so the myth that these dogs need 'training'and trick teaching and 'good manner's persists as the way to solve the issue and hence perhaps why there is such a huge failure rate mentioned in the article.

Many dogs I have seen were well socialised- in fact too much so- the Doggy Daycare set up seems to overwhelm many dogs and taking them out of that large socialisation can massively improve the dog's stress level.

The Quality of Life Questionnaire also gets the specialists here riled up- whilst excellent in many ways to help an owner decide if the time is coming close - the 5 points completely fail the mentally ill 'bad behaved' dog who could score full marks on the questionaire as they can eat and drink and walk and toilet under control and as they wish- and will have more good days than bad- to a non trained observer- yet these pets are in a really bad place.

I am a general practitioner- I euthanise about 1 dog every 5 years for behaviour issues -and whilst they had good body scores re muscle and weight ranges etc-no way could these suffering dogs be classified as ótherwise'healthy and so I was quite ok removing them from their pain and their owners and their in-contacts from the danger these dogs represented.

We dont tell mentally ill humans to go and socialise with other humans and dogs willy nilly, we dont give them 'trick'to perform or commands and teach them 'good manners' as a way to cope with the mental anguish and heavy load and dark world and the daily unbearbale body wide 'pain' so many mental health patients talk of. Shame that we should think that is all 1 in 5 of our dog patients need the same done to them.

RE: 98% of vets asked to euthanise healthy pets for bad behaviour

Arlo Guthrie — Mon, 12 Sep 2016 08:48:38 GMT

To be fair, I don't think the BVA ever labelled these behaviours as 'naughty', but a serious consequence of poor socialisation. But I take your point, and the second para should have read 'otherwise healthy dogs'.

RE: 98% of vets asked to euthanise healthy pets for bad behaviour

Aine Seavers — Sun, 11 Sep 2016 23:10:23 GMT

Why is an animal with severe mental health issues classified as 'normal and healthy'?-when they are anything but! If one in 5 animals has a mental health issue as the veterinary physiologists now say is the rate-then suggesting it is a fixable behaviour with 'training'is a disservice to the pet, an insult to humans with mental health disorders and puts the veterinary surgeon in a lose lose situation euthanising a supposedly 'healthy'animal. A dog who attacks his owner, who is globally fearfully and highly distructive is not "healthly' and so I am very sad to see British Vet Assoc continue to mislabel animal mental health issues as naughtly behaviour in a healthy pet.

RE: 98% of vets asked to euthanise healthy pets for bad behaviour

Hannah Wynne Richards — Thu, 08 Sep 2016 07:32:36 GMT

That's contract killing, not euthanasia

Wynne