Loss of a Beloved Pet

quirkytizzy

This is horrible. I have sympathy for the dog, but very little left over for the OP. The last hours of this animal's life must have been confusing and awful.

Yes. I feel badly that I responded with such sympathy, not having read too closely the original post. An overdose in an animal is just the same as it is in a human - terrifying, a complete loss of control, and panic inducing. That's horrifying. A quick call at an emergency vet clinic would have likely done the euthanizing for cheap and much more humanely.

Ramberta

Euthanasia is 'murder'. And yet people take their pets in to have that process done for reasons that sometimes don't deserve it-- they're old and can't control their bladders, they scratch up furniture or children, they have a violent disposition, the list goes on.

This dog was old, and ALREADY suffering horribly on his own-- saying that the OP put the dog in more distress is a moot point. If someone had manned up and snapped the poor old dog's neck in one quick, clean motion, you would have gasped and cried 'murderer' at that too.

If OP had waited until the next day to take it to the vet it would have been going through hours of agony ANYWAY, only to die and leave OP $300 poorer in the process.

It's so *kitten* easy to judge and to tell someone they've done a horrible thing when YOU were never in a position to have to make that kind of choice in the first place. Get off your high horses and pedestals everyone, and have a heart!

Ramberta

This is horrible. I have sympathy for the dog, but very little left over for the OP. The last hours of this animal's life must have been confusing and awful.

Yes. I feel badly that I responded with such sympathy, not having read too closely the original post. An overdose in an animal is just the same as it is in a human - terrifying, a complete loss of control, and panic inducing. That's horrifying. A quick call at an emergency vet clinic would have likely done the euthanizing for cheap and much more humanely.

How exactly is taking a suffering animal to an unknown place and handing it over to a stranger to be injected NOT panic inducing? We pat ourselves on the back and say euthanasia is better, but it's not. Also, if you'd read some of OP's later comments, she said that the clinic wasn't open in the middle of the night. So the dog would've been in horrible pain all night anyway, no matter what course of action was taken...

IHAVEPMS247

I hope your boyfriends family decide never to own another pet... Visualing shoving 100 benadryl down the innocent eyes of the dog is enough to make me sick. What a terrible way for the dog to die.

quirkytizzy

Euthanasia is 'murder'. And yet people take their pets in to have that process done for reasons that sometimes don't deserve it-- they're old and can't control their bladders, they scratch up furniture or children, they have a violent disposition, the list goes on.

This dog was old, and ALREADY suffering horribly on his own-- saying that the OP put the dog in more distress is a moot point. If someone had manned up and snapped the poor old dog's neck in one quick, clean motion, you would have gasped and cried 'murderer' at that too.

If OP had waited until the next day to take it to the vet it would have been going through hours of agony ANYWAY, only to die and leave OP $300 poorer in the process.

It's so *kitten* easy to judge and to tell someone they've done a horrible thing when YOU were never in a position to have to make that kind of choice in the first place. Get off your high horses and pedestals everyone, and have a heart!

No. You're speaking to people who have decades of experiences in loving animals and seeing them die. I will not argue this point further with you than to say that if you believe overdosing an animal is humane, then dear god, please do so with a quick acting drug when your pet's time comes.

That's the whole point of shooting an animal, or twisting it's neck, or taking it into the vet - it's fast. It happens so quickly that not only does the animal not recognize what's going on, it absolutely does not draw out any further suffering.

If you support a form of death that prolongs suffering, you should not own a pet. Ever.

blondemom1979

If I were you I would remove this post, not something to talk to strangers about. Inappropriate. I'm sure you did what you felt you had to do but not something you should share.

Ramberta

Euthanasia is 'murder'. And yet people take their pets in to have that process done for reasons that sometimes don't deserve it-- they're old and can't control their bladders, they scratch up furniture or children, they have a violent disposition, the list goes on.

This dog was old, and ALREADY suffering horribly on his own-- saying that the OP put the dog in more distress is a moot point. If someone had manned up and snapped the poor old dog's neck in one quick, clean motion, you would have gasped and cried 'murderer' at that too.

If OP had waited until the next day to take it to the vet it would have been going through hours of agony ANYWAY, only to die and leave OP $300 poorer in the process.

It's so *kitten* easy to judge and to tell someone they've done a horrible thing when YOU were never in a position to have to make that kind of choice in the first place. Get off your high horses and pedestals everyone, and have a heart!

No. You're speaking to people who have decades of experiences in loving animals and seeing them die. I will not argue this point further with you than to say that if you believe overdosing an animal is humane, then dear god, please do so with a quick acting drug when your pet's time comes.

That's the whole point of shooting an animal, or twisting it's neck, or taking it into the vet - it's fast. It happens so quickly that not only does the animal not recognize what's going on, it absolutely does not draw out any further suffering.

If you support a form of death that prolongs suffering, you should not own a pet. Ever.

I never said that the exact way in which OP administered the medication was 'humane'. However, there IS no truly 'humane' way to put an animal down, only ways that we convince ourselves are better to make us feel less horrible for putting it in motion rather than letting it happen naturally. The only 'humane' way to lose a pet is to keep it comfortable in its final moments.

But thanks for making lots of assumptions about what *I* would do with *my* animals, even though I never said a damn thing about myself. Go find someone else to try and make feel bad, please.

quirkytizzy

I never said that the exact way in which OP administered the medication was 'humane'. However, there IS no truly 'humane' way to put an animal down, only ways that we convince ourselves are better to make us feel less horrible for putting it in motion rather than letting it happen naturally. The only 'humane' way to lose a pet is to keep it comfortable in its final moments.

Then you will notice the outrage over the OP's form of euthanizing was over her choice of method. Most of us have had a pet that has died, either through natural causes or through putting them down. I've lost three - one who died naturally, another who flatlined on the surgery table, and another one whose internal organs were shutting down due to kidney malfunctions. You'll find very few people want to kill their pets, no matter how they do so. I'm sure the OP didn't want to kill her pet. But there were better, faster ways of doing it.

That's what people were upset about - not about the dog itself having to be put down.

Contrarian

This is horrible. I have sympathy for the dog, but very little left over for the OP. The last hours of this animal's life must have been confusing and awful.

Yes. I feel badly that I responded with such sympathy, not having read too closely the original post. An overdose in an animal is just the same as it is in a human - terrifying, a complete loss of control, and panic inducing. That's horrifying. A quick call at an emergency vet clinic would have likely done the euthanizing for cheap and much more humanely.

How exactly is taking a suffering animal to an unknown place and handing it over to a stranger to be injected NOT panic inducing? We pat ourselves on the back and say euthanasia is better, but it's not. Also, if you'd read some of OP's later comments, she said that the clinic wasn't open in the middle of the night. So the dog would've been in horrible pain all night anyway, no matter what course of action was taken...

She also said that the dog was having seizures at 11am. Surely that would have been the time to take the dog to the vet. And when you take an animal to the vet for euthanasia, you don't just pass the animal off to someone and walk away. You stay. You comfort the animal. You scratch its ears and cuddle it and speak softly to it until it dies.

You don't know what choices others have had to make. You're at least as judgemental as the people you are accusing. In our cases, though, we do have some information that allows us to assess this particular situation.

Ramberta

I never said that the exact way in which OP administered the medication was 'humane'. However, there IS no truly 'humane' way to put an animal down, only ways that we convince ourselves are better to make us feel less horrible for putting it in motion rather than letting it happen naturally. The only 'humane' way to lose a pet is to keep it comfortable in its final moments.

Then you will notice the outrage over the OP's form of euthanizing was over her choice of method. Most of us have had a pet that has died, either through natural causes or through putting them down. I've lost three - one who died naturally, another who flatlined on the surgery table, and another one whose internal organs were shutting down due to kidney malfunctions. You'll find very few people want to kill their pets, no matter how they do so. I'm sure the OP didn't want to kill her pet. But there were better, faster ways of doing it.

That's what people were upset about - not about the dog itself having to be put down.

But that is exactly my point-- we're perfectly okay with a licensed professional killing our pet, because it is 'humane'. We'll even pay out the *kitten* for it! But strip that vet title away and suddenly there's outrage? That's what I don't understand.

Edit: I'm not demonizing veterinarians, before I get flamed for that too. I am all for seeking treatment for a sick pet from a professional, but when it's the end, I'm not paying extra money to have my pet put down and convince myself it's the "right thing to do". No, I'm not going to self-medicate them either, but I'm not going to believe this BS that euthanasia is 'humane'. It's mercy killing, but it's still KILLING. If you want a truly 'humane' death you wait by their side until the very end, and that is that.

quirkytizzy

But that is exactly my point-- we're perfectly okay with a licensed professional killing our pet, because it is 'humane'. We'll even pay out the *kitten* for it! But strip that vet title away and suddenly there's outrage? That's what I don't understand.

Generally vets have access to painless, fast acting drugs that most of us do not. And when given the option to use that as opposed to shooting your animal, most of us would rather have someone else do it while we grieve by the table, holding our pet in the last moments. Certainly, that's how I prefer it.

blondemom1979

OP has deleted her account

gonnalosesomweight

But that is exactly my point-- we're perfectly okay with a licensed professional killing our pet, because it is 'humane'. We'll even pay out the *kitten* for it! But strip that vet title away and suddenly there's outrage? That's what I don't understand.

Generally vets have access to painless, fast acting drugs that most of us do not. And when given the option to use that as opposed to shooting your animal, most of us would rather have someone else do it while we grieve by the table, holding our pet in the last moments. Certainly, that's how I prefer it.

And how do you know that these drugs are infact painless? Have you had the procedure done on yourself? No? Then you really have no freaking idea do you?

Ramberta

But that is exactly my point-- we're perfectly okay with a licensed professional killing our pet, because it is 'humane'. We'll even pay out the *kitten* for it! But strip that vet title away and suddenly there's outrage? That's what I don't understand.

Generally vets have access to painless, fast acting drugs that most of us do not. And when given the option to use that as opposed to shooting your animal, most of us would rather have someone else do it while we grieve by the table, holding our pet in the last moments. Certainly, that's how I prefer it.

And how do you know that these drugs are infact painless? Have you had the procedure done on yourself? No? Then you really have no freaking idea do you?

^This. I don't think vets are lying to us about the desired effects of said drugs, but I think it's bullsh!t that it's essentially giving an animal the lethal injection and being passed off as 'humane'

Contrarian

I never said that the exact way in which OP administered the medication was 'humane'. However, there IS no truly 'humane' way to put an animal down, only ways that we convince ourselves are better to make us feel less horrible for putting it in motion rather than letting it happen naturally. The only 'humane' way to lose a pet is to keep it comfortable in its final moments.

Then you will notice the outrage over the OP's form of euthanizing was over her choice of method. Most of us have had a pet that has died, either through natural causes or through putting them down. I've lost three - one who died naturally, another who flatlined on the surgery table, and another one whose internal organs were shutting down due to kidney malfunctions. You'll find very few people want to kill their pets, no matter how they do so. I'm sure the OP didn't want to kill her pet. But there were better, faster ways of doing it.

That's what people were upset about - not about the dog itself having to be put down.

But that is exactly my point-- we're perfectly okay with a licensed professional killing our pet, because it is 'humane'. We'll even pay out the *kitten* for it! But strip that vet title away and suddenly there's outrage? That's what I don't understand.

I don't think anyone is actually "okay" with having to put down a pet. The issue here is that the OP had no way of knowing what side effects the animal could have experienced. It clearly took some time before the animal died from the overdose. Vet induced euthanasia is very, very fast, so any suffering is extremely short-lived. Also, dogs hate taking pills, and giving one 100 would not have been at all pleasant.

I understand what you are saying, Ramberta, but there are some differences between how a vet would have handled it and how the OP did. They may seem subtle to you, but they aren't to most animal lovers. It's about being gentle and kind to the animal, and making the horrible, but inevitable, as stress-free and quick as we can.

IHAVEPMS247

I think she deleted her account. Must not have like the negativity.

gonnalosesomweight

This is horrible. I have sympathy for the dog, but very little left over for the OP. The last hours of this animal's life must have been confusing and awful.

Yes. I feel badly that I responded with such sympathy, not having read too closely the original post. An overdose in an animal is just the same as it is in a human - terrifying, a complete loss of control, and panic inducing. That's horrifying. A quick call at an emergency vet clinic would have likely done the euthanizing for cheap and much more humanely.

How exactly is taking a suffering animal to an unknown place and handing it over to a stranger to be injected NOT panic inducing? We pat ourselves on the back and say euthanasia is better, but it's not. Also, if you'd read some of OP's later comments, she said that the clinic wasn't open in the middle of the night. So the dog would've been in horrible pain all night anyway, no matter what course of action was taken...

She also said that the dog was having seizures at 11am. Surely that would have been the time to take the dog to the vet. And when you take an animal to the vet for euthanasia, you don't just pass the animal off to someone and walk away. You stay. You comfort the animal. You scratch its ears and cuddle it and speak softly to it until it dies.

You don't know what choices others have had to make. You're at least as judgemental as the people you are accusing. In our cases, though, we do have some information that allows us to assess this particular situation.

And She also said her bf had their only car and could go to jail if he left work. there are a lot of factors you people arent lookig at

quirkytizzy

And how do you know that these drugs are infact painless? Have you had the procedure done on yourself? No? Then you really have no freaking idea do you?

I do not know. But the heartbeat that stops in a matter of 30 seconds, that takes a previously yowling animal in obvious pain, as opposed to a long overdose that takes hours to kill them, would seem to point to a quick and painless death.

Those who claim there is never a reason to put an animal down have never seen their animal at the point of death and in pain. That changes your opinion on what is humane and what is not.

Contrarian

But that is exactly my point-- we're perfectly okay with a licensed professional killing our pet, because it is 'humane'. We'll even pay out the *kitten* for it! But strip that vet title away and suddenly there's outrage? That's what I don't understand.

Generally vets have access to painless, fast acting drugs that most of us do not. And when given the option to use that as opposed to shooting your animal, most of us would rather have someone else do it while we grieve by the table, holding our pet in the last moments. Certainly, that's how I prefer it.

And how do you know that these drugs are infact painless? Have you had the procedure done on yourself? No? Then you really have no freaking idea do you?

^This. I don't think vets are lying to us about the desired effects of said drugs, but I think it's bullsh!t that it's essentially giving an animal the lethal injection and being passed off as 'humane'

It is essentially an overdose of anaesthesia. I have had anaesthesia before. It wasn't painful.

Contrarian

This is horrible. I have sympathy for the dog, but very little left over for the OP. The last hours of this animal's life must have been confusing and awful.

Yes. I feel badly that I responded with such sympathy, not having read too closely the original post. An overdose in an animal is just the same as it is in a human - terrifying, a complete loss of control, and panic inducing. That's horrifying. A quick call at an emergency vet clinic would have likely done the euthanizing for cheap and much more humanely.

How exactly is taking a suffering animal to an unknown place and handing it over to a stranger to be injected NOT panic inducing? We pat ourselves on the back and say euthanasia is better, but it's not. Also, if you'd read some of OP's later comments, she said that the clinic wasn't open in the middle of the night. So the dog would've been in horrible pain all night anyway, no matter what course of action was taken...

She also said that the dog was having seizures at 11am. Surely that would have been the time to take the dog to the vet. And when you take an animal to the vet for euthanasia, you don't just pass the animal off to someone and walk away. You stay. You comfort the animal. You scratch its ears and cuddle it and speak softly to it until it dies.

You don't know what choices others have had to make. You're at least as judgemental as the people you are accusing. In our cases, though, we do have some information that allows us to assess this particular situation.

And She also said her bf had their only car and could go to jail if he left work. there are a lot of factors you people arent lookig at

Taxi? Bus? Neighbour? Relative?