Medical Care for My Dog?

[King_Lazy]

I appreciate the companionship of our dog, and the lessons in compassion that he’s provided for our children, but I also know that having him is a safely measure. There have been a lot of burglaries in our area, I am often home alone, and feel much safer knowing my dog barks his head off, sounding much more fierce than he really is, if anyone approaches the house.

Dogs are truly fantastic animals, and we seem to be able to relate to them better than to most animals because of their easy-to-read body language, allowing us easily and reliably to gauge their emotional state and, in a sense, understand them. Dogs, in turn, are very finely attuned to human body language, and as pack animals descended from wolves, have an incredible ability to understand us in a unique way too.

That, coupled with many dogs’ affectionate nature and rather remarkable intelligence and ability to pick up on human cues, such as language, often even without ever having been taught, along with their sometimes unswerving loyalty, friendship, happiness and unconditional love, really makes dogs stand out in the animal world as man’s worthy companion, even more so than other animals that may perhaps objectively be more intelligent.

I’m grateful to God for every dog that I’ve ever had the pleasure of loving and being loved by. Our canine friends are God’s gift to mankind, and though they are of a lower order and value when compared to humans and their interests must always be subordinated to human interests where doing otherwise may result in a human being suffering serious harm, these animals are certainly deserving of all the love and care that we can reasonably offer them.

 

[severus68]

Dogs are truly fantastic animals, and we seem to be able to relate to them better than to most animals because of their easy-to-read body language, allowing us easily and reliably to gauge their emotional state and, in a sense, understand them. Dogs, in turn, are very finely attuned to human body language, and as pack animals descended from wolves, have an incredible ability to understand us in a unique way too.

That, coupled with many dogs’ affectionate nature and rather remarkable intelligence and ability to pick up on human cues, such as language, often even without ever having been taught, along with their sometimes unswerving loyalty, friendship, happiness and unconditional love, really makes dogs stand out in the animal world as man’s worthy companion, even more so than other animals that may perhaps objectively be more intelligent.

I’m grateful to God for every dog that I’ve ever had the pleasure of loving and being loved by. Our canine friends are God’s gift to mankind, and though they are of a lower order and value when compared to humans and their interests must always be subordinated to human interests where doing otherwise may result in a human being suffering serious harm, these animals are certainly deserving of all the love and care that we can reasonably offer them.

I agree wholeheartedly with you about dogs. Not so much about their lower value when I see what some humans with their superior intelligence, made in the image of God do.

 

[Newbie2]

If your dog is four and hasn’t been vaccinated since you’ve had her, you need to let her vet(s) know. Surgeries and clinics are full of stuff she’s susceptible to; distemper is the one coming off the top of my head.

Once you’re over this emergency, you really do need to have her thoroughly checked out by a vet as well as vaccinated. If money is tight, check in your area for a low-cost, sliding-scale clinic or the SPCA (if you live in the US). She’s going to need to be wormed, get her jabs for rabies, etc.

Good luck!

Luna

Actually, pets get “de-wormed”. And we veterinarians prefer the term “vaccinated” over “jabs”.

 

[america_natalie]

Please do not feel guilty. However, make it an obligation to also be charitable with serving the poor.

I have two beautiful pets, one cat and one dog. They have brought me so much joy and I know that God truly did have a plan when he brought them into my life. They are, too, God’s creation and should be treated with care when we make ourselves responsible for them. There have been times when they have hurt my pocketbook but I am their caregiver and need to make the sacrifice to keep them healthy.

With that being said, I try not to spend lavishly and live a modest life so that when these expenses come about, I don’t worry too much about overspending on something that might seem excessive to others and try my best to be charitable with any other extra funds I may have or offer my time to different causes.

God Bless!

 

[drdaz]

Those Humans who wouldnt spend the money on their dog dont deserve to have Pets! Why allow your dog to suffer?? God would not want that, so definitely not a sin! And big ups to you for allowing your pet a second shot!!

 

[Lochias]

Please do not feel guilty. However, make it an obligation to also be charitable with serving the poor.

I have two beautiful pets, one cat and one dog. They have brought me so much joy and I know that God truly did have a plan when he brought them into my life. They are, too, God’s creation and should be treated with care when we make ourselves responsible for them. There have been times when they have hurt my pocketbook but I am their caregiver and need to make the sacrifice to keep them healthy.

With that being said, I try not to spend lavishly and live a modest life so that when these expenses come about, I don’t worry too much about overspending on something that might seem excessive to others and try my best to be charitable with any other extra funds I may have or offer my time to different causes.

God Bless!

This answer for me. Well put.

 

[TheRealJuliane]

Actually, pets get “de-wormed”. And we veterinarians prefer the term “vaccinated” over “jabs”.

That’s a common term for shots in the UK. They call human shots “jabs” too.

 

[King_Lazy]

That’s a common term for shots in the UK. They call human shots “jabs” too.

That’s true. You’ll commonly find the influenza vaccine being referred to as the “flu jab” here. If you Google the term, you’ll find it used in on the NHS website and in newspaper articles, so it’s pretty standard usage and doesn’t even qualify as slang.

 

[white_sheep]

It’s fine, within reason. There is certainly a point at which you should not spend the money on the dog and to continue to do so would be wasteful.

 

[PatriceA]

It’s fine, within reason. There is certainly a point at which you should not spend the money on the dog and to continue to do so would be wasteful.

But one cannot say for another pet owner what is the point that the care becomes wasteful. I may be willing to spend or not spend an X amount of dollars on my pet compared to someone else. Its a personal decision, as long as the owner has the means to care for the pet they certainly can spend all the money they want.

 

[sw85]

Hello:

Our 4 year old pet dog suddenly became paralyzed in her hind legs. I took her to the vet, who sent us to the animal emergency hospital. After an MRI, the veterinary neurosurgeon said she had two ruptured discs in her spine and required surgery to save her life. We went ahead with the surgery, she is recovering, and should make a full recovery.

From the beginning, I had serious qualms about spending the substantial amount of money, not to mention medical expertise, on spinal surgery for our dog. She is young and will hopefully live many more years. She is a very special and sweet dog, particularly with our children and my very ill mother who is living with us. Yet there are many, many humans who don’t have the kind of medical care she just received and it feels morally wrong.

The surgery has been done, so I guess my question for you is: was it a sin for us to have allowed the surgery for our pet when so many humans go without treatment?

Thanks,
Audrey

I think bookcat’s answer is sound: that this is a prudential judgment.

Animals are entitled to certain things from us by virtue of their dependency on us. They are entitled to being given the food, water, shelter, and love they need. They do not have a natural right to second-order goods like medical care.

That doesn’t mean you can’t provide them medical care, but it means that consideration of providing them with medical care should be subordinated to other goods. Namely, it’s OK to let your dog die from illness in order to keep your family fed, sheltered, etc., if you can’t do both.

I can see how spending too much on your dog could be a sin against prudence. I think the standard for that is pretty high, though. Asking your family to make sacrifices, such as eating less at dinner, isn’t necessarily a bad thing. On the other hand, asking your family to go without dinner entirely probably would be sinful.

So while it really depends on the circumstances, from what you describe you’re probably fine.

 

[Luna_Lovecraft]

I think bookcat’s answer is sound: that this is a prudential judgment.

Animals are entitled to certain things from us by virtue of their dependency on us. They are entitled to being given the food, water, shelter, and love they need. They do not have a natural right to second-order goods like medical care.

That doesn’t mean you can’t provide them medical care, but it means that consideration of providing them with medical care should be subordinated to other goods. Namely, it’s OK to let your dog die from illness in order to keep your family fed, sheltered, etc., if you can’t do both.

I can see how spending too much on your dog could be a sin against prudence. I think the standard for that is pretty high, though. Asking your family to make sacrifices, such as eating less at dinner, isn’t necessarily a bad thing. On the other hand, asking your family to go without dinner entirely probably would be sinful.

So while it really depends on the circumstances, from what you describe you’re probably fine.

People who have to decide if they should allow their pets die of a disease because they cannot afford the nominal costs of euthansia should not have pets. Period.

Luna

 

[King_Lazy]

People who have to decide if they should allow their pets die of a disease because they cannot afford the nominal costs of euthansia should not have pets. Period.

Luna

Indeed. However, dogs live about 10 to 15 years, and people lose jobs, become overburdened with mortgage debt, end up having to spend lots of money on their own medical treatment, etc., so the circumstances in which a family may not be able to afford to euthanise their pet may be unforeseen.

 

[white_sheep]

But one cannot say for another pet owner what is the point that the care becomes wasteful. I may be willing to spend or not spend an X amount of dollars on my pet compared to someone else. Its a personal decision, as long as the owner has the means to care for the pet they certainly can spend all the money they want.

I disagree entirely. While there is plenty of wiggle room here for prudential judgement, the bounds are certainly not limitless.

 

[severus68]

People who have to decide if they should allow their pets die of a disease because they cannot afford the nominal costs of euthansia should not have pets. Period.

Luna

Absolutely!

 

[Luna_Lovecraft]

Indeed. However, dogs live about 10 to 15 years, and people lose jobs, become overburdened with mortgage debt, end up having to spend lots of money on their own medical treatment, etc., so the circumstances in which a family may not be able to afford to euthanise their pet may be unforeseen.

Then you find a no-kill shelter or rescue that will take the diseased animal and care for it, or you take it the SPCA or other humane society, where they will euthanize a sick animal for free if you claim destitution. Worse comes to worse you start cold calling vet offices; many vets and vet techs are softies and are willing to help out owners in crises by tapping into and pulling strings in rescue netsworks in their area. My vet’s practice always has a couple of cats looking to get re-homed. Always.

What is unconscionable is to allow a sick/diseased animal to suffer and die because one is ill or in debt. Pets aren’t toys; they’re not fashion accessories; they aren’t status symbols; they aren’t disposable; they’re not presents; they aren’t teaching tools for one’s children. They aren’t sins, which is an odd idea that pops up around here from time to time. They’re living entities that deserve to be responsibly, humanely cared for.

Have a back-up plan when you adopt an animal. We’ve agreed to take our in-laws cats should something happen to them and vice-versa. Before you adopt do the math and your homework. Can you afford routine and end-of-life care, given a dog can live to 15 and a cat can live ten years longers than that? At 50 do you really want that bird that will likely live another 75 years? If you’re just starting your family, will have babies in the house for the next 20+ years, maybe that constrictor isn’t such a good idea.

Rescue organizations would welcome more people actually stopping and thinking for 15 minutes before they buy this year’s fad breed or animal.

I’ll reiterate, if people aren’t willing and/or able to do basic homework, they’re not seeing animals for the responsibility they are and should not bring them into their lives.

Be mindful.

 

[PatriceA]

I disagree entirely. While there is plenty of wiggle room here for prudential judgement, the bounds are certainly not limitless.

I didn’t say it was limitless. But you cannot say what my limit would be anymore than I can make the decision for you.

 

[PatriceA]

Indeed. However, dogs live about 10 to 15 years, and people lose jobs, become overburdened with mortgage debt, end up having to spend lots of money on their own medical treatment, etc., so the circumstances in which a family may not be able to afford to euthanise their pet may be unforeseen.

It cost $100 to euthanize our dog when it was time. Not unreasonable IMO. I thought it would be a lot more.

 

[King_Lazy]

Then you find a no-kill shelter or rescue that will take the diseased animal and care for it, or you take it the SPCA or other humane society, where they will euthanize a sick animal for free if you claim destitution. Worse comes to worse you start cold calling vet offices; many vets and vet techs are softies and are willing to help out owners in crises by tapping into and pulling strings in rescue netsworks in their area. My vet’s practice always has a couple of cats looking to get re-homed. Always.

PatriceA:

It cost $100 to euthanize our dog when it was time. Not unreasonable IMO. I thought it would be a lot more.

Obviously, you should do whatever you can to ease the animal’s suffering. I can’t imagine a situation in a developed country where euthanasia would be unaffordable or the help of an animal charity unavailable.

I do imagine that there may be places in the world where cheap or free euthanasia is unavailable, in which case DIY euthanasia might be the better option, but that’s a bit too icky to talk about and I doubt many people would actually go and do it.

 

[ringil]

People who have to decide if they should allow their pets die of a disease because they cannot afford the nominal costs of euthansia should not have pets. Period.

Luna

I agree with you. However there are different levels to providing medical care. My 13 year old cat has kidney failure. To treat this I give him a quarter of a pepcid per day, fish oil, and canned food. We were giving him the special low protein stuff but he wouldn’t eat it. I figured that keeping his weight up is as important as doing what we can for his kidneys. He is expected to be around 8-12 more months.

So my plan for him is when he stops eating We will let the guy go. Now, it is actually possible to give him a treatment at that pont that would mean 3 days in the vet hospital and would possibly extend his life a few more months. Some folks even take their cats to dialysis.

For me these steps seem excessive and even postpone the discomfort of the pet.

So yes, folks do need to provide care for their pets, but to what extent would be a personal decision.