Euthanasia case for discussion....

Re: Euthanasia case for discussion....

Daniel Furey — Wed, 13 Apr 2011 23:02:51 GMT

[quote user="robloxley"]

Likewise. But might the animal's welfare be better if alive and in a different situation, rather than dead? (A difficult question to answer). And my point was rather that our starting point should be from the animal's welfare standpoint, not that euthanasia was a welfare issue.

[/quote]

Aside from the answers you have had already to this, I don't think I would assume the animal's welfare would be better elsewhere. Some "difficult" dogs seemed to get passed from owner to owner, each of whom thinks they can cope, only to find that they can't.This is far from ideal for an animal that needs stability, plus it usually only serves to make the behaviour even worse.

(is it me or are there loads of rescue collies with this type of history...).

Re: Euthanasia case for discussion....

mariette asselbergs — Wed, 13 Apr 2011 11:16:14 GMT

[quote user="Busybee"]

Interesting case came in this morning. Woman phoned to say she wanted her dog put to sleep. When asked why, she says the dog has attacked another dog and bitten her husband this morning. There are a couple of notes on the dog's record card mentioning it's aggression (though previously recorded towards dogs, not people). The dog is a 5yr old bull terrier with no other health problems.

My colleague saw the dog so I don't know under what circumstances the dog attacked the other dog and the husband. Just thought it would make an interesting discussion with regards the moral issues raised....

Do you put the otherwise healthy, young dog down when behavioural referral, training and/or rehoming could be an option? (I don't know if it was in this case).

Or do you refuse (or at least want to refuse) because it's possibly treatable, but run the risk of the dog attacking dogs/people again?

Discuss.....!

[/quote]

I have had several (English) bull terriers in my life. Most of them lovely, funny, bit mad dogs and not the brightest. But some do have an aggressive tendency towards other dogs, irrespective of behaviour training. And if so, they are horrific fighters because of their very strong bite, tendency to not let go ever, and seemingly low sensitivity to pain themselves especially around the head. The only way to let them release the victim was by suffocating them until almost unconscious. One of them could only ever be off the lead with a basket muzzle on, and then would still try to go for other dogs, but at least could do no harm. I have seen one or two in practice which were also threatening to me (the vet), which I found very unusual because they are mostly very lovely with people. But if they are not, and if there are dominance issues with a young adult male biting a person in the family, I would not take the risk to try to educate/train/or rehome because the damage they do when they bite is tremendous.

Euthanasia is always a tragedy in these circumstances, but I would not hesitate.

Mariette

PSI now have two bitches (both rescue dogs) which are both the biggest softies in the world with all creatures, dogs,cats, birds, chinchillas, people, anything.

Re: Euthanasia case for discussion....

Vikki Halliday LLB — Mon, 28 Mar 2011 21:58:09 GMT

[quote user="Bob Russell"]

Fortunately none of my children have been aggressive so the issue of euthanasia is not relevant to them. They are, however the cause of an emotional roller-coaster, does that qualify?

[/quote]

Re: Euthanasia case for discussion....

Bob Russell — Mon, 28 Mar 2011 11:39:36 GMT

Fortunately none of my children have been aggressive so the issue of euthanasia is not relevant to them. They are, however the cause of an emotional roller-coaster, does that qualify?

Re: Euthanasia case for discussion....

Mark Holmes — Mon, 28 Mar 2011 09:07:43 GMT

[quote user="Vikki Halliday"]where children are involved, I would always euthanase on request follwoing aggression[/quote]

now that is something I would support.... although not sure the liberal left would be very happy. We are not even supposed to smack them these days.

Re: Euthanasia case for discussion....

Vikki Halliday LLB — Sun, 27 Mar 2011 21:53:16 GMT

[quote user="robloxley"] But might the animal's welfare be better if alive and in a different situation, rather than dead? [/quote]

That is not really a valid question, as Gillian et al have pointed out, at the point you euthanase an animal, the welfare ceases to be an issue.

I'm not sure that anyone has the answer to this, however where children are involved, I would always euthanase on request follwoing aggression.

I have also refused to euthanase, where for example an animal snapped at the owner whilst recovering from an epileptic fit, (the dog's first), and advised investigation and treatment of the probable epilepsy. However it has preyed on my mind as this was at the PDSA, and the client never returned for the result of the bloods, and therefore could conceivably have either made up the story to try and get a "free" euthanasia, or just taken it to another vet.

I once rehomed a little jack russell, who had bitten the owner and his older chidren. He was later diagnosed with bilateral glaucoma, and lost an eye, and has since then still been a little aggressive to strangers who approach his head, but the current owners are fully aware and know how to deal with this.

In the case for discussion, I would more than likely euthanase, as having been through the rehoming/treatment route, I am of the opinion that some dogs are inherently aggressive, and I for one am not prepared to take the risk of further injury to an innocent party.

Re: Euthanasia case for discussion....

Rob Loxley — Mon, 21 Mar 2011 13:51:32 GMT

[quote user="Michael Woodhouse"]

[quote user="Gillian Mostyn"]Animals do not have any knowledge of their own mortality. Dead animals cannot suffer. Euthanasia/killing , carried out correctly, can never be a welfare issue. If it was, we would all be veggies![/quote]

Agree 100% Gillian

[/quote]

Re: Euthanasia case for discussion....

Michael Woodhouse — Mon, 21 Mar 2011 13:44:35 GMT

Agree 100% Gillian

Re: Euthanasia case for discussion....

Gillian Mostyn — Mon, 21 Mar 2011 12:51:50 GMT

[quote user="robloxley"]I'm not saying I'd have done differently to you in your case, but as this is a discussion on veterinary ethics, surely we shouldn't forget that our oath is that our "constant endeavour will be to ensure the welfare of animals committed to our care". [/quote]

Animals do not have any knowledge of their own mortality. Dead animals cannot suffer. Euthanasia/killing , carried out correctly, can never be a welfare issue. If it was, we would all be veggies!

Re: Euthanasia case for discussion....

Niall Taylor — Mon, 21 Mar 2011 07:27:50 GMT

[quote user="Stephen Courtney"]Animals are legally property of owners who have the right to tell us what to do with them... so long as it is done humanely and the animals do not suffer unduly [/quote]

Not sure I entirely agree with that, the ethics of some situations have to be taken into account and I have certainly refused euthanasia on occasions when it is simply for the convenience of the owner.

[quote user="Stephen Courtney"]Of late I find euthanasias preying on my mind... I find i have more time to dwell on the realities of what i am doing...and I don't like it much at all[/quote]

Me too. It's strange but that is the one part of the job for me that is actually getting harder with experience.

As for the original question - yes, I would have euthanased the animal, for the same reasons everyone has mentioned.

Niall

Re: Euthanasia case for discussion....

Stephen Courtney — Sun, 20 Mar 2011 22:17:12 GMT

Regarding the ethics of what we do in the context of the veterinary oath - I think it depends on the definition of 'welfare'. Animals are legally property of owners who have the right to tell us what to do with them, and so long as it is done humanely and the animals do not suffer unduly then as far as I am concerned welfare is taken care of.

This is no different to other pts situations, and no different to people deciding what treatment they would like for their pets - such as a euthanasia instead of insulin or phenobarbitone or other appropriate treatment for a long term condition. it happens all the time.

And stuff like this is why I am adamantly NOT in favour of human euthanasia or assisted suicide. You can justify anything if you try hard enough, and justifying life-ending decisions for individuals who can't tell you what they want, is something I would hate to see enter human medicine. Of late I find euthanasias preying on my mind. As a new grad I was so wound up about technique and making sure I hit the vein , as a more experienced vet I was more worried about making everything as smooth as possible, and as bit more experienced vet, I find i have more time to dwell on the realities of what i am doing...and I don't like it much at all. But we don't provide a hospice service for terminally ill pets, and I wouldn't be in favour of that either...

I think ultimately we should trust in our own good intentions and do the best we can for our patients and our clients, and get the best night's sleep we can. sorry for the ramble, just coming off the weekend shift!

Re: Euthanasia case for discussion....

Michael Woodhouse — Sun, 20 Mar 2011 21:56:04 GMT

I don't think re-homing is appropriate for a dog that has aggressively bitten someone. What if it seems fine and then kills a little kid or a baby?

Very simply I'd rather see it was put to sleep humanely and the owners took on another unwanted dog.

Where would we stand if someone brought in a dog for PTS, we talked owner into re-homing and then something awful happened? Not a position I would ever put myself in.

Re: Euthanasia case for discussion....

sophia guymer — Sun, 20 Mar 2011 17:27:14 GMT

I was doing a dental about 3 months ago when the receptionist brought a little poodle cross through saying it needed pts. I was rather stunned and asked why? Apparently the dog had bitten the owners on several occasions and they couldn't handle it anymore.

I phoned the owner after telling the receptionist in no uncertain terms never to do such a thing again, in my view the owners should have at the very least been seen by a vet!

The poor dog looked petrified when it came in. It was small (had it been a big dog I would have not taken the risk, I am ashamed to have to admit) and very cute.

So after speaking to the owner, getting an idea of when and why the dog was aggressive and getting her permission to try to rehome him rather than pts (her son wanted the dog pts'ed because his kids might get bitten when they went round nannies, the woman was destroyed about it. He was only ever aggressive in very specific circumstances and a lot of it was brought on by the circumstances in which he lived)

I had him for 5 weeks, fostered him for a local rescue organisation who was looking for a home for him. I have two boys, 5 and 6. They are very lifely although very sensible with animals. Not once did he cause any problems (I did have a cage in the house for him. To start with he was in there unless I had my full attention with the kids and dog (so if I was in the kitchen doing something the dog would not be with me, but in the cage) but after a few days that was no longer necessary.

I nevertheless did advice to rehome him in a house without small children.

He is now very happy and relaxed with a single man who adores him, he comes to work etc etc.

I will always consider if rehoming is an option, or if owners are able and willing to treat, but have as above, put dogs to sleep when small children were involved and aggression was unpredictable e.g. I will never refuse to put a dog to sleep in such a situation.

Re: Euthanasia case for discussion....

Rob Loxley — Sun, 20 Mar 2011 16:27:34 GMT

[quote user="Emily Nightingale"]At the end of the day human life has to come first.[/quote]

I'm not saying I'd have done differently to you in your case, but as this is a discussion on veterinary ethics, surely we shouldn't forget that our oath is that our "constant endeavour will be to ensure the welfare of animals committed to our care".
We may agree that the animal can't remain in its current situation e.g. to avoid future harm to a child, but surely our ethical standpoint as vets as to whether to perform euthanasia to achieve this should come from how the welfare of the dog would be best ensured in the future.

I think a similar scenario came up in Everyday Ethics in In Practice not so long ago and some eloquent arguments made for ways forward.

Re: Euthanasia case for discussion....

Anonymous — Sun, 20 Mar 2011 15:50:08 GMT

I would tend to agree, in most cases I would err on the side of caution especially if it has been noted before. If there has been no previous notes then I often send them for assesment before pts. Sometimes it can be helpful for the owner to know that they are making the right decision. I am not a behaviourist but would generally suggest that no aggression problem can be sorted properly especially if there are children involved and therefore pts is the best option but at least all the bases have been covered.

The only thing that bothers me sometimes is the tiny doubt in my mind if it is genuine. Maybe its my suspicious mind but you do wonder sometimes if it may be the husbands/wifes dog in a messy divorce, I'm sure its happened. this may be why I tend to send them for assesment pre pts unless obviously aggressive although i wouldn't ever refuse, unless I am very suspicious which hasn't happened so far. i do trust my clients , honest!

Re: Euthanasia case for discussion....

bob lehner — Sun, 20 Mar 2011 11:33:35 GMT

I agree with others and have no problems euthanasing a dog which has bitten a person, unless there are some very mitigating circumstances.

I don't want to carry the burden of having advised against euthanasia and then learn later that the dog has inflicted serious damage on a child or other innocent party.

Personally I wouldn't go down the 'referral to behaviourist' route. Would any behaviourist offer a written guarantee that the dog they have treated would never bite a person again ?

Basically pet dogs have to fit into human society and I take the view that there are quite enough nice dogs out there to go round, not to worry too much about those that are not suitable as domestic pets.

Re: Euthanasia case for discussion....

Emily Nightingale — Sun, 20 Mar 2011 11:11:23 GMT

I had a 18 month old Rhodesian Ridgeback that had a fitting episode and growled at the owner when it was coming around. This frightened the owner so much that after much discussion they elected to euthanase as they had two small children and felt unsafe- just after this one episode.

It sounds heartless I know but I didn't have any qualms about euthanasing the dog. I had been through all the options from rehoming, to MRI scans, to trialling anticonvulsive tx, and in the end it was the owners decision. At the end of the day human life has to come first.

Re: Euthanasia case for discussion....

CatherineThomas — Sat, 19 Mar 2011 22:10:41 GMT

[quote user="Stephen Courtney"]

I do sometimes wonder if the story is true though - people you've never seen before, wanting a PTS and saying he has bitten a child - I think some people know most vets won't argue the situation with a background like that.....or am I just cynical?

[/quote]

I know what you mean. I had a doberman who had a gastric foreign body, we removed the foreign body with help from the Blue Cross for payment and the dog did fine. A few months later the lady brought him back saying he was vomitting again and she was sure it must be the same thing again, she couldn't afford it and so he would have to be put to sleep. I convinced her (with difficulty) to try medical treatment for the vomitting as I didn't think it was another foreign body. She went away and didn't come back for any check ups. A few weeks later she returned saying he'd bitten her young child. This dog was so nice natured, he hadn't shown any signs of aggression at any time when he was with us and I don't believe he did it but I didn't feel I could refuse to put him to sleep.

Re: Euthanasia case for discussion....

Stephen Courtney — Sat, 19 Mar 2011 21:21:43 GMT

I would euthanase such a dog on request. Referral for a lengthy and potentially difficult situation like this is often not an option, people are distressed and upset and it's not my place to make it worse if such a referral is not wanted.

However I do feel that an unwanted dog, for whatever reason, is often better humanely PTS'd than dumped or depositied into the rehoming/ rescue cycle - especially if there are behavioiural issues that will make rehoming difficult and potentially carry a liability should another person be injured.

Re: Euthanasia case for discussion....

CatherineThomas — Sat, 19 Mar 2011 19:29:14 GMT

I don't have a problem with PTS for a dog that has bitten a person. I think if that dog went on to attack a child and I had refused to PTS, or had talked them out of it, or hadn't suggested PTS as an option when asked for advice, how would I feel then?

But, I used to deal with dogs from one of the Blue Cross centres. They had a policy that if a dog showed aggression it would be put to sleep. They had lots of staffies and we would often be brought really sweet staffies to put to sleep because of dog to dog aggression, even if they hadn't shown any signs of aggression towards people. It was awful and I hated doing it.

Re: Euthanasia case for discussion....

Louise6732 — Sat, 19 Mar 2011 17:57:39 GMT

I have no problems with euthanasia of aggressive dogs at the owners' request. I hope that doesn't make me sound heartless! When owners ring for advice in these situations I always discuss options - refer to a QUALIFIED and recognised behaviourist for therapy, which involves a lot of commitment from the owner, is not a quick fix etc, but may work. Other option is PTS.

Had one a few months ago where a working cocker spaniel had previously snapped at a child, child had aggrevated the dog, O' consequently then always supervised dog with kids. Had a friend over, friend, owner, dog and child in kitchen, owner literally turned to set a cup on the counter, dog had bitten the child in that split second Just shows that even with supervised time it can still happen. O' very sensible and made hard decision for PTS, which I thought was the right thing in that situation.

As I've said, I have no problem with the moral/ethical issues of PTS a dog who has bitten. I find myself much much more tested ethically when I have to deal with owners who are letting geriatric decrepid animals continue on because they 'seem bright and are eating'!

Louise

Re: Euthanasia case for discussion....

Gillian Mostyn — Sat, 19 Mar 2011 17:52:38 GMT

Unless the owner is sensible and prepared to put a lot of time, effort and money into treating this problem I will euthanase any animal that is reported as being aggressive with people.