Ref: http://animalcare.my/2012/04/26/can-we-neuter-our-way-out-of-killing/
Remember yesterday’s article which I posted (link above) about rehoming being more important than neutering and urging shelters to be no-kill ones?
I sent the article to two shelter managers and I did not receive a straight-off “No” from them. Rather, one replied saying their shelter is working towards no-kill. The other said theirs would reflect on the contents of the article.
When it comes to the question of euthanasia, I think most of us agree that “unjustified” reasons like “moving to an apartment”, “the skin problem is too bad”, “I have no money for vet bills”, should not be entertained by vets. But then again, what is “unjustified” in our opinion can be very justified in the opinion of the owner.
THAT is the whole problem, isn’t it?
Where do you draw the line?
In our experience, several cases were clear-cut euthanasia cases, like Sunshine Courage, Bushytail, Mickey – all three are alive today because we refused to give up and refused to give in. Sunshine was paralysed. Bushytail had pyometra and mastitis in all her milk glands, Mickey had a blocked urethra and a hidden penis.
Here’s another article written by the same author. He had his cat, Gina, euthanised, and these are his reflections:
http://www.nathanwinograd.com/?p=7885
Let me just cut and paste the last part here:
I continue to struggle about the decision to end Gina’s life, and hope I did the right thing. I have been assured by others that I did, but, for the first time in my life, I am not so sure. And I also can’t help but think of larger implications; that if hospice care were the norm and people no longer killed their companion animals even at the end-stages of their lives, or at the very least, if doing so was not the common choice, the ramifications for the sanctity of animal life would be tremendous. If the discussion were to unfold as a movement, as a society, within the veterinary community, and carried the same weight and gravity that it evokes when the topic relates to the same issue, but concerns our human family members, the impact on society’s tolerance for the mass killing in what we euphemistically call “shelters” (but are often little more than death camps) would be sea-changing. I believe that is what we owe the Ginas who allow us to share our lives with them.
If only she could have answered me that day when I whispered in her ear as we said goodbye to her for the last time, “Sweetheart, is this what you would have wanted?”
You know, this was one of the reasons that made me decide to hang on with Wendy, our most difficult case ever – I did not know what she really wanted.
Wendy was dying of distemper, it was beyond help. The vet advised and some quarters pressured me till no end to have her euthanised. I was accused of being “cruel” because I did not give the order to have her killed. Strange, isn’t it, that not killing is deemed cruel? And the even stranger thing is that those people who insisted I was cruel and that Wendy was suffering had never even visited Wendy before. So I did wonder how they knew she was suffering.
Say what you must, but the truth is, I could not do it. I looked into her eyes, and I saw her strength and peace. I could not take that away from her. I had no right.
Even with Sunshine Courage, I was reprimanded for not ordering her euthanasia. And again, this was by someone who had not even visited Sunshine. Why does one give the order to kill another living being when one has not even seen her, much less, nurse her?
In our spiritual practice, we do not have hard and fast rules. Every case is different. There are rules, of course, but we basically go by what we FEEL and think is right. It is the heart and brain working together to make the best possible decision.
A spiritual teacher whom I consulted said this: Ask the animal, and you shall receive your answer.
So, I “asked” Wendy, and I received her answer, as best as I could interpret.
On the question of euthanasia, as a medical fund that is no-kill, of course we will go all out to provide no-kill support and care for all the animals who come our way. But please let me state here that we have never said euthanasia was wrong nor have we ever judged those who opt for it. I think I need to make this very clear to everyone, because those who believe in euthanasia get very upset with us for promoting no-kill.
We are not upset with those who support euthanasia, so why are they upset with us? Let us respect each other for what we do since we all have the animals’ best interests at heart, only in our own ways.
Wendy had the will to live on, and as her caregiver, I owed it to her to see her through and I did that, with the help of friends.
I read from somewhere that animals have simpler minds than us (which could be a good thing) and if they are our pets, they remain faithful and devoted to us till the end. And animals know when to let go. But those who are pets, have attachments to us, just as we have to them. So when it is time for them to go, sometimes we have to give them permission to go. Whisper to them, “It’s ok to go.” They will know when to go.
I saw Vixey and Mac tbrough till the end, they were my pets, they passed on just a few years ago. And Puffin and Remirth too, my childhood pets. Remirth waited for my mother to come home before breathing her last. She had cancer, but was loyal till the end. During Puffin and Remirth’s days, we lived in a small town, euthanasia was unheard of. We nursed our animals till the very end. We coped.
And as I look back now, I have no regrets.
At least I do not have to bear that lingering doubt that the author has, and wished he could have received an answer when he whispered, “Sweetheart, is this what you would have wanted?”
Further reflections:
On building a no-kill community: http://www.nathanwinograd.com/?p=8908
Comments
8 responses to ““Sweetheart, is this what you would have wanted?” – a reflection on euthanasia”
I find that in the end, it all comes down to what each person believes in. Some people believe that suffering is worse than death (indeed, Buddhism teaches us how to free ourselves from suffering, doesn’t it?). I don’t think it’s right to judge people who have euthanized animals–especially if they obviously thought long and hard about it and most people I know put down their pets after a long period of illness and suffering because one day, their pets “told” them.
It is said that animals are ready to leave this world (something humans can’t usually do), and that when they are ready, they “tell” us. Maybe a dog who loves to eat, even when sick–can’t even lift its head up to eat anymore–that to me, is a sign that it is in so much pain that the kinder thing to do is to let it go.
I find that some people do not want to euthanize because they are selfish. Rather than let their ailing, dying, suffering pets leave this world, they refuse to let them go (in Buddhism, “attachment”) because they are afraid of the pain they would feel once their pet is gone. I know of several people who have told me that the REGRET not euthanizing their pets. It haunts them to this day, to remember the pain that their pets were put through. They now realize that the only reason why they did not put them down was because THEY could not bear the thought of life without the pet, NOT because they felt that euthanasia is wrong.
I support euthanasia in humans as well–if somebody wants to die because they are tired of their suffering, they should be able to do so. After all, it is their life. They should be able to make their choice.
I know that you say animals can’t make their own choices so we have to make the choices for them, but in the end, it all boils down to what do you think is worse? Suffering or death? Many people say that they would like to die painlessly–in their sleep, in a plane crash where death is instant. Nobody likes pain. In fact, in the final moments of some cancer patients’ lives, they ask to die instead of to be in this world, suffering, incoherent because their system has been pumped up with so many painkillers like morphine.
I know it’s a grey area on “when to put a pet down”. I think that people need to think for themselves on these things. I have found that most loving pet owners I know have NEVER put a pet down if there was any hope left–sort of like your case with “Wendy”. It’s a difficult decision but I feel nobody should be made to feel like a horrible person because they made the BRAVE decision to let their pets go when they knew it was the right thing to do.
If I may repeat myself, Su Ann. We are not judging anyone.
I know that is what you’re saying, but with all the posts about euthanasia that you’ve posted lately, it sure feels like you are trying to tell us that euthanasia is very, very wrong.
Then, let me clarify clearly now that that is NOT what I am saying. Maybe you have not read another post I wrote sometime last year where we even comforted a reader who chose to euthanize one of her rescues.
Here is the link: http://animalcare.my/2011/08/23/all-dogs-go-to-heaven/
I have never said euthanasia is wrong. We promote no-kill, and our medical fund is no-kill, so we live by what we stand for. I have never criticised people who choose to have their animals euthanised. Promoting and encouraging no-kill is very different from condemning euthanasia. On the contrary, I have been lambasted for promoting no-kill.
I hope this clarifies.
Hi Su Ann,
It’s possible to agree and to promote one issue (in this case no-kill) without condemning another who promotes something contradictory (in this case euthanasia). As long as both parties agree to respect the differences and try to understand their choices. In the end each of us have to make a stand, but we have to do this by understanding why others maintain another stand. This kind of thinking seems to be lacking among Malaysians (especially politicians). We were taught since young that if you are not one-of-the-gang then you are one-of-the-enemy. This need not be so.
I’ve read Dr Chan’s post a few times, I dont think it was ever her intention to make anyone feel like a horrible person because they have made the decision to let their pets go.
I euthanised one of my pets last year because of illness. Reading Dr Chan’s article does not make feel guilty of what I had done. On the contrary, I felt there is a sense of empathy from her as I felt she respected my decision.
I cannot find anything in her postings where she criticised people for putting their pets to sleep. I think she was merely sharing her own stories that she had not put any of her pets or the stray animals under her care to sleep. I respect her stand and I wish I can be as brave as her to see the pain of any suffering animal.
What she does on her own and what AnimalCare, the society stands for, are two different things.
I think in an earlier post, I recall Dr Chan explaining why AnimalCare is no-kill. It is because the donors come from various religions and in most religions, killing is forbidden (“Thou shalt not kill”), hence to respect all donors, AnimalCare’s funds cannot be used to sponsor any form of killing.
So, it is not about right or wrong. It is merely how Dr Chan manages the funds, with due respect to their donors, and what her committee has collectively decided in their policies and constitution.
Well, I think it’s just like the people who strongly support euthanasia will write in a form like not euthanising is very very wrong. 🙂
When we believe in a concept, and idea, or a belief, certainly we would promote it. I personally don’t find Dr Chan’s posts condemning euthanasia. The most were comparisons.
I actually quite agree with some of the points you mentioned, Su Ann, eg: on euthanasia in humans. I can’t say if this is right or wrong, but I guess it really depends on what each person believes. 🙂
su ann, the world does not revolve around u. period. please stop being such a pain in the ***. thx.