Euthanasia of healthy animals.

Re: Euthanasia of healthy animals.

Simon Neuhoff — Fri, 12 Nov 2010 16:33:54 GMT

I would be surprised if Evelyn reads it in 2110! In fact it is extremely unlikely I will read it in 2110 - unless the medics come up with something fairly radical!

Re: Euthanasia of healthy animals.

Laurence Webb — Fri, 12 Nov 2010 00:45:27 GMT

If C.I.Morgan can invent a noun in 1890 why can't anyone else invent one? If it ends up in common usage then that is the important thing isn't it?

I would like to propose "Jagirk" as an expression of surprise. I suppose Evelyn would be surprised if he reads it in the OED 2110 edition but anything's possible.

Re: Euthanasia of healthy animals.

Evelyn Barbour-Hill — Thu, 11 Nov 2010 22:18:14 GMT

[quote user="Mark Holmes"]

[quote user="Evelyn Barbour-Hill"]"A human construct"?( I'd be happier using the word "construction'', as I can see no justification here for inventing a new noun "construct".) [/quote]

Pasted from online dictionary

con·struct /v. kənˈstrʌkt; n. ˈkɒnstrʌkt/ Show Spelled [v. kuhn-struhkt; n. kon-struhkt] Show IPA –verb (used with object) 1. to build or form by putting together parts; frame; devise. 2. Geometry . to draw (a figure) fulfilling certain given conditions. –noun 3. something constructed. 4. an image, idea, or theory, esp. a complex one formed from a number of simpler elements.

Please can we have a smiley with its tongue out?

[/quote]

I humbly beg your pardon. I see the noun was invented in about 1890 by someone named C.I.Morgan, "for the sake of convenience" as he puts it.

Re: Euthanasia of healthy animals.

Mark Holmes — Thu, 11 Nov 2010 12:38:27 GMT

[quote user="Evelyn Barbour-Hill"]"A human construct"?( I'd be happier using the word "construction'', as I can see no justification here for inventing a new noun "construct".) [/quote]

Pasted from online dictionary

Please can we have a smiley with its tongue out?

Re: Euthanasia of healthy animals.

Jillian Hall — Thu, 11 Nov 2010 12:21:18 GMT

[quote user="Evelyn Barbour-Hill"]

Define "value" in this context. "Prejudiced"? Explain the relevance of this word here. "A human construct"?( I'd be happier using the word "construction'', as I can see no justification here for inventing a new noun "construct".) Yes, of course it's a human construction. What of it? "No basis in reality"....... what reality are you referring to?

[quote user="Matthew Watkinson"]anthropocentric function[/quote]

Ultimately, that's the reason for everything whatsoever that we do. Isn't it? All discuss.

[/quote]

'Nuff said

Re: Euthanasia of healthy animals.

Evelyn Barbour-Hill — Wed, 10 Nov 2010 14:15:52 GMT

[quote user="Matthew Watkinson"] As George Orwell noted in Animal farm: "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others" [/quote]

Er, no, he didn't. He had the pigs on the farm inventing that slogan. Animal Farm was a satire upon Communism, not a plea for animal welfare.

[quote user="Matthew Watkinson"]wild difference in value between farm animals and companion animals is a prejudiced human construct with no basis in reality.[/quote]

[quote user="Matthew Watkinson"]anthropocentric function[/quote]

Ultimately, that's the reason for everything whatsoever that we do. Isn't it? All discuss.

Re: Euthanasia of healthy animals.

Mark Holmes — Wed, 10 Nov 2010 13:41:02 GMT

[quote user="Matthew Watkinson"]Truth is, this debate is extremely simple to solve for those who wish to be consistent: either it’s right to kill healthy animals (regardless of race or anthropocentric function) or it’s not, but that’s so simple I am sure it will either be violently rejected or completely ignored.[/quote]

I will euthanase/kill a healthy animal but to say that it is as simple as right and wrong is somewhat dehumanising. When I butchered my pigs a few years ago. I held them whilst they were shot, it was awful, I hated doing it and would rather not have had to, but then they were delicious and their liver was still warm when it hit the pan. If meat is going to be part of my diet it id something I have to accept.

Matthew as with most of your arguments, you seem unable to perceive the world in anything other than black and white. What is wrong with accepting it as something I'm prepared to do whilst not enjoying it. Or not being prepared to do whilst accepting that others might be.

You seem to think the world has only right and wrong. As both of these concepts are just a human constructs then they are both determined by the bulk of opinion and hence are going to be open to debate.

Re: Euthanasia of healthy animals.

Matthew Watkinson — Wed, 10 Nov 2010 13:23:18 GMT

This is one of the indulgent ethical conundrums that really irritates me about the veterinary profession. I realise it would be a lot harder to make money in the emotionally charged world of small animal practice without being totally inconsistent with the value of life, but there is still no doubt that the wild difference in value between farm animals and companion animals is a prejudiced human construct with no basis in reality. As George Orwell noted in Animal farm: "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others" and this is exactly the kind of 'ethical' nonsense driving everybody who can bleed from the heart over pet animals while bleeding from absolutely nowhere as they tuck into a chicken sandwich. Despite widespread belief that killing things for a reason is better than killing things without, the victims themselves couldn't care less about pious human justifications. To be fair, if they're not aware they're going to be killed (or have been killed), they don't care at all, but that hasn't stopped the veterinary profession regularly working itself into an 'ethical' frenzy about the right and wrongs of killing some things but not others based entirely on the subjective value externally placed upon them. Truth is, this debate is extremely simple to solve for those who wish to be consistent: either it's right to kill healthy animals (regardless of race or anthropocentric function) or it's not, but that's so simple I am sure it will either be violently rejected or completely ignored.

Re: Euthanasia of healthy animals.

Hannah Wynne Richards — Tue, 02 Nov 2010 10:48:32 GMT

I'm with Micheal on this Last Saturday I had a client in-newly bought Staffie had attacked the cat-luckily the cat managed to run underneath some furniture. I tried (and totally failed ) to persuade the owner that it WASN'T a good idea for them to share a home !!!!!!!!!!!

Wynne

Re: Euthanasia of healthy animals.

Michael Woodhouse — Mon, 01 Nov 2010 21:53:55 GMT

[quote user="Martin Atkinson"]that had allegedly had a fight with her other dog[/quote][quote user="Martin Atkinson"] I refused and told her I would help her re-home it but I would not kill it.[/quote]

And if it goes on to kill another dog whilst with the new home you just found? Or worse?

I have seen dogs personalities change in an instant [as I'm sure we all have]. The suggestion of aggression [whether I had witnessed it or not] I would positively recommend euthanasia.

Re: Euthanasia of healthy animals.

Martin Atkinson — Mon, 01 Nov 2010 11:28:36 GMT

An ex-client (now goes to cut-price vet up the road) turned up today with a perfectly healthy and very friendly Mastiff young bitch that had allegedly had a fight with her other dog and she wanted it euthanased. I enquired why they hadn't taken it to their new vet and she said she couldn't get an appointment. We phoned them and they had no recall of them trying to book an appointment there. Despite much soul searching and self-recrimination by the client I refused and told her I would help her re-home it but I would not kill it. Just sounded a bit too dodgy to me.

Re: Euthanasia of healthy animals.

Hannah Wynne Richards — Wed, 20 Oct 2010 16:40:13 GMT

At least I didn'thave to kill them-I probably would now, as the Inspectors are banned from using euthatal

Wynne

Re: Euthanasia of healthy animals.

Mark Holmes — Wed, 20 Oct 2010 16:26:26 GMT

[quote user="Hannah Wynne Richards"]

Mark I don't think I could ever get to that point, but you're right about "passing the buck " Some years ago I did the work for the local RSPCA Centre The Centre had a no killing policy, so once an animal was admitted, it sometimes occupied a pen for ages, especially as they had a rather unrealistic set of conditions which new owners had to comply with-someone had to be home all day, which was OK 50 years ago when you had housewives. Anyway, what this meant was that they couldn't admit other animals, which might have been easier to re-home, so the Inspectors had to PTS them, but they weren't killed by the Centre-as they had never been admitted, so the Centre continued to boast of it's no-killing policy

Wynne

[/quote]

Thats extactly the same as my experience. The kennels full of dogs that would not rehome for one or another reason and I am killing puppies and young dogs by the handful because they cannot get into the kennels. ( A van full would arrive 1-2 times a week, 5 dogs or so at a time)

I always thought that if I was killing dogs I would rather it be those which would not rehome, but then politically its better for the RSPCA to have a no kill policy that to consider the welfare of the dogs!

Re: Euthanasia of healthy animals.

Gillian Mostyn — Wed, 20 Oct 2010 15:49:29 GMT

Re: Euthanasia of healthy animals.

Martin Atkinson — Wed, 20 Oct 2010 15:40:32 GMT

[quote user="Gillian Mostyn"]

[quote user="Martin Atkinson"]Whatever your take is on this subject, don't make excuses, be honest with yourself.[/quote]

I find your insinuation that I am simply making excuses for my behaviour, rather than having thought about the problem and come to my own conclusions, rather offensive. I would behave differently to you in this situation. My reasons are valid - not just excuses.

[/quote]

Ouch! Although we may take differing views on this I'm not totally self-righteous and I have certainly euthanased healthy animals and done far worse things against my better wishes at the time or regretted later and tried to justify it to myself and I'm big enough to admit it. Whether or not I agree with your policy Gillian, I wasn't insinuating you or anyone else in particular was making excuses for their behaviour, merely that if one truly believes that something is against one's better judgement one should follow one's heart, not do something one wishes one hadn't then make excuses to oneself to justify it. I can respect your decisions and still be friends with you even if we disagree. Is that better?

Re: Euthanasia of healthy animals.

Gillian Mostyn — Wed, 20 Oct 2010 14:41:03 GMT

[quote user="Martin Atkinson"]Whatever your take is on this subject, don't make excuses, be honest with yourself.[/quote]

Re: Euthanasia of healthy animals.

Hannah Wynne Richards — Wed, 20 Oct 2010 10:42:54 GMT

Wynne

Re: Euthanasia of healthy animals.

Mark Holmes — Wed, 20 Oct 2010 10:32:06 GMT

[quote user="Martin Atkinson"]'I will euthanase healthy animals because at least I know its been done professionally and the animal won't be dumped', approach is a bit of a cop-out to alleviate the conscience [/quote]

Maybe... but then some of us need a cop out. Its not such a problem now but in a previous job I was faced with this 2-3 times a week. Options are exhausted very quickly. To be honest its often the case that "If I don't kill this healthy animal here somebody else will have to kill another" To refuse is just passing an unpleasant buck and that really is a cop out!

You really can get to the point that you are able to do it mid sandwich and then carry on as normal.

Re: Euthanasia of healthy animals.

Hannah Wynne Richards — Wed, 20 Oct 2010 10:08:24 GMT

Whatever decision the veterinary surgeon takes, it is stressful.and a matter of individual conscience I wonder how much these unnecessary killings contribute to the appalling suicide rate in our profession ?

Wynne

Re: Euthanasia of healthy animals.

Martin Atkinson — Wed, 20 Oct 2010 09:56:10 GMT

[quote user="Jonathan Wray"]

[quote user="Gillian Mostyn"]I'm just saying that you can usually come to a compromise - but if the guy had been adament, then I would have agreed to the euthanasia rather than send him away to do goodness knows what.[/quote]

Perhaps a wheelie bin?

If you perform the euthanasia, then you can be certain it was carried out in a professional and "dignified" manner. You are not relying on someone else. You are shouldering an onerous responsibility. It won't be the only one in a career.

[/quote]

I think the; 'I will euthanase healthy animals because at least I know its been done professionally and the animal won't be dumped', approach is a bit of a cop-out to alleviate the conscience and can be likened to the vet who vaccinates puppy farm puppies in the knowledge that he is condoning and propagating an abhorent practice but kids himself by saying, 'Its better I do it because at least I have some control over the situation and if I don't someone else will', although some are sadly still motivated purely by gain. Whatever your take is on this subject, don't make excuses, be honest with yourself. If I refuse to PTS a healthy animal of course I worry that it may get dumped but I am not responsible for every other person's bad decisions. Sometimes its a harder to walk away from something you don't approve of than to succumb to pressure to participate.

Re: Euthanasia of healthy animals.

Niall Taylor — Wed, 20 Oct 2010 07:43:11 GMT

[quote user="Martin Atkinson"]My thoughts entirely. Notwithstanding all the arguments beforehand I would have refused the request.[/quote]

Couldn't agree more. In these circumstances I would have refused to do the PTS, particularly since the deceased owner had never actually discussed her wishes or the reasons for them with the practice as she was composing her will. We will consider each request of this type on a case by case basis but by and large will not pts healthy animals.

Absolutely that means it's someone else's problem, I'm happy that it is the problem of the owner or their relatives - it is for them to deal with and I'm not going to give them an easy way out. It's surprising how often a new home suddenly manifests itself when they realise that we're not going to be used for their convenience in this way.

Having said that I have a sweet old lady client with a sweet young Jack Russell on the books who thinks I have agreed to pts her dog in the event that the owner pre-deceases it (I haven't) and that I understand agree with her reasons (I don't). That's giving me a few sleepless nights.

Niall

Re: Euthanasia of healthy animals.

J G Wray — Wed, 20 Oct 2010 07:40:44 GMT

Perhaps a wheelie bin?

The consent is crucial. We have had two cases of our patients euthanased by a neighbouring practice, because of misidentification by an owner. One of them was chipped, but not checked. The vet in the other practice was mortified and has subsequently put in place a universal scanning policy, but they were safeguarded by having a consent and an informed consent at that - for the wrong animal.

JGW

Re: Euthanasia of healthy animals.

Gillian Mostyn — Tue, 19 Oct 2010 20:35:02 GMT

I have to say this problem has arisen very rarely for me. The last time was a young man who lost his wife to leukaemia in the week between xmas and new year. They had a 6 year old cat who had been well cared for (by us) but he could hardly care for himself at that time, and knew he was in no position or frame of mind to care for the cat. He tried all the usual places - either full or shut for the holidays. He brought her to us and he very happily agreed to me keeping the cat at the practice (FOC - yes , I know - but he had been a good client) for one week until the rescue centre reopened. .....

......4 years later....and Maisie (the cat in question) is currently sat with me watching me type...... so yes, I do have a soft side! What can I say - she has an adorable personality!

I'm just saying that you can usually come to a compromise - but if the guy had been adament, then I would have agreed to the euthanasia rather than send him away to do goodness knows what.

Re: Euthanasia of healthy animals.

Daniel Furey — Tue, 19 Oct 2010 20:21:53 GMT

According to the code of conduct regarding the euthanasia of a healthy animal:

"Where, in all conscience, a veterinary surgeon cannot accede to a client's request for euthanasia he or she should recognise the extreme sensitivity of the situation and make sympathetic efforts to direct the client to alternative sources of advice."

Which I think roughly translates as, if you don't feel you can do it, send it to a vet who will. Although if someone ends up going from vet to vet there's still the problem of them getting fed up and abandoning (or killing) the animal.

I've only been in this situation once- a youngish cat presented for euthanasia for soiling the house. I'd love to have the faith in humanity to assume that the owner had explored every single option and come to a difficult decision. As it was, on firm questioning, I discovered that the owner had recently stopped it going outdoors and didn't want to put down litter trays for it. I wish that was a joke.

The owner wasn't keen to rehome for the same reasons as the guy in the first post- she didn't want to wait. I found an effective solution was to sign it over to the practice but charge the owner "rent" to keep it until the rspca could take it on and rehome it- this went down well as the amount I suggested worked out less than the euthanasia/cremation fee would have been. Maybe that could have worked for the second two cats in the original post?

Re: Euthanasia of healthy animals.

Simon Neuhoff — Tue, 19 Oct 2010 15:56:53 GMT

This is exactly how I feel about it. Each vet has to make up his or her own mind in each case (and on a case by case basis) but I don't think a blanket refusal to euthanase is the correct option. I always explore the options in depth with the owner and usually we come to a solution that does not involve pts but I think it can be the lesser of two evils.

[quote user="Gillian Mostyn"]

Unless you are willing to take personal responsibility for rehoming the animals concerned then I think it is rather idealistic to just refuse to euthanase. Contrary to other opinions, I don't feel that animal welfare is compromised by euthanasia. However, it may be compromised by sending it away. Out of sight is out of mind eh?

[/quote]s.